


Class Z. 4 \ 



cl o y» ^ 

Copyright If_' 


COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT; 

























































RAMBLES IN 
AUTOGRAPH LAND 


BY 

ADRIAN H. JOLINE 

'\ 


ILLUSTRATED WITH 
MANY PORTRAITS 
AND FACSIMILES 


G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS 
NEW YORK AND LONDON 
Gbe fmickerbocfcer press 

MCMXIII 





Copyright, 1913 

BY 

MARY E. L. JOLINE 



Ube Tknicfcerbocfcer ipreas, Hew florfc 


©CI.A354987 


K, 


FOREWORD 


To most men an avocation is merely what 
the word, in its strict significance, implies 
—a relaxation from the serious business 
of life. But Adrian Hoffman Joline made 
the practice and pursuit of literature a very 
real thing. He loved books and bookmen 
with a genuine passion, and he wrote about 
them with a sympathetic insight that was as 
far removed from dilettanteism as from ped¬ 
antry. Now “collecting” is too often a mere 
manifestation of the selfish instinct for exclu¬ 
sive possession; with Joline it was a joy so 
vital and so generous that he could not rest 
until he had shared it with his fellow-men. 
It was the human document that interested 
him, and the rare edition, the priceless auto¬ 
graph, were only the outward and visible 
signs of an underlying spirit. A book or a 
manuscript meant to him personality, and he 


iv 


tforeworb 


possessed the happy faculty of both discerning 
it for himself, and of making it visible to others. 
His was the blessed sense of humour, which, 
in the highest analysis, is only another name 
for understanding. He laughed at foibles, 
but he did not sit in judgment upon faults. 
He was a keen critic, but he was content to 
sift the wheat from the chaff without smother¬ 
ing his readers in the dust of the controversial 
threshing-floor. He talked with his books and 
autographs rather than about them; and any 
interested bystander, who cared to join the 
friendly circle, was sure of a welcome; the 
only password was sympathy, the only quali¬ 
fication, a measure of the host’s own kindly 
tolerance. Overburdened with the many 
cares of his busy professional life, he yet made 
time and occasion for communion with the 
immortals, and in their noble company he 
found inexhaustible refreshment for both 
body and mind. And so, when he wrote 
about his books, and their makers, the domi¬ 
nant note was that of an affectionate gratitude 
for benefits bestowed, for happiness conferred. 
His own literary work was a ministry of un- 





Bookplate of Adrian Hoffman Joline, en¬ 
graved by J. W. Spenceley 






















Iforewort* 


V 


pretending love. The very simplicity of his 
titles— Meditations of an Autograph Collector , 
Diversions of a Book Lover , Peapack Papers , 
etc.—bears witness to the unaffected modesty 
with which he regarded his excursions along 
the highway of letters. His was a pure offer¬ 
ing, and one that carried with it its own en¬ 
during reward. 

The manuscript of Rambles in Autograph 
Land was found among Mr. Joline’s post¬ 
humous papers, and he had spent the greater 
part of the last summer of his life in making it 
ready for the press. A certain amount of 
revision and rearrangement of material re¬ 
mained to be done, and this task has been 
accomplished by Mrs. Joline, the first and 
always the chief sharer of her husband’s 
literary confidences. 


Van Tassel Sutphen. 








Bookplate of Adrian Hoffman Joline, engraved by 
W. F. Hopson 

















CONTENTS 

CHAPTER PAGE 

I.—Unread Books i 

II.—Facsimiles and Forgeries . . 28 

III. —The Autograph in Literature . 45 

IV. —Autographs and Extra-Illustration 64 

V.—The Autograph Market . . 78 

VI.—Private Vendors and their Ways . 99 

VII.—Collectors and their Methods . 115 

VIII.—My Own Collection . . .132 

IX.—Diaries.158 

X.—Some Nineteenth-Century Writers 179 

XI.— A Group of English Statesmen . 206 

XII.—Colonial Notables .... 233 

XIII. --American Authors .... 259 

XIV. —Two New England Philosophers . 281 

Index. 3*7 


vii 







































































































































































































‘ . 




























































































ILLUSTRATIONS 

PAGE 

Adrian Hoffman Joline . . Frontispiece 

From a photograph by Pach 

Bookplate of Adrian Hoffman Joline . iv 
Engraved by J. W. Spenceley 

Bookplate of Adrian Hoffman Joline . vi 
Engraved by W. F. Hopson 

Edgar Allan Poe.64 

From an etching 

Page of Original Draft of a Letter (7 pages) 
by Edgar Allan Poe, undated, but 


WRITTEN ABOUT 1844 .... 66 

Laurence Hutton. 128 

From a painting from life by Dora Wheeler Keith 

Last Page of A. L. S. (5 pages) of Laurence 
Hutton, April 18, 1903 .... 130 

Thomas Gray .13a 

From the engraving by T. Basire 


Manuscript Poems by Thomas Gray, with 
Annotation by Horace Walpole . .136 

Charles Lamb.138 

From an engraving of the painting by Henry Meyer 


X 


HUustrations 


PAGE 

A. L. S. of Charles Lamb to Robert Southey, 
November 7, 1804.138 

First and last Pages of A. L. S. of Charles 
Lloyd to Robert Southey, undated . .140 

George Gordon, Lord Byron . . .140 

From a mezzotint 

Portion of Original MS. of “Oscar of 


Alva,” by George Gordon, Lord Byron 142 

Thomas Hood.144 

First Page of A. L. S. (4 pages) of Thomas 
Hood to F. O. Ward, undated . . . 144 

Robert Southey.146 


From an engraving by E. Finden after the painting 
by T. Phillips, R. A. 

Page of Original MS. of “The Curse of 
Kehama, ” by Robert Southey . . .146 

Matthew Prior . . . . . .148 

First Page of A. L. S. (3 pages) of Matthew 
Prior, June 17,1708.148 

Alfred, Lord Tennyson . . . .150 

First Page of A. L. S. (3 pages) of Alfred, 

Lord Tennyson, to Bayard Taylor, March 
19,1866 ....... 150 

Percy Bysshe Shelley 

From an engraving by W. Finden 


• 152 




Illustrations 


XI 


PAGE 

A. L. S. of Percy Bysshe Shelley to Hay¬ 
ward, April 27,1817 .... 152 

First Page of A. L. S. (3 pages) of Bryan 
Waller Procter, December 25,1866 . 154 

Samuel Rogers .156 

From an engraving by W. Finden after the paint¬ 
ing by Sir Thomas Lawrence 

First Page of A. L. S. (2 pages) of Samuel 
Rogers, April 12,1841 .... 156 

John Evelyn ..158 

From the engraving by W. H. Worthington after 
the painting by Walker 

A. L. S. of John Evelyn, to Samuel Pepys, 

May 10, 1700.160 

Richard Steele ..162 

From the engraving by G. Vertue after the painting 
by I. Thornhill 

A. L. S. of Richard Steele to Sir Thomas 
Hamner, March 21, 1714 . . . 162 

Samuel Johnson .164 

Last Page of A. L. S. (2 pages) of Samuel 
Johnson, September 4,1784 . . .164 

Edmund Burke ... . . 166 

First and Last Pages of A. L. S. of Edmund 
Burke to Fanny Burney, July 29,1782 . 166 

Robert, Baron Clive. 168 




xii 


1! [lustrations 


page 

Last Page of A. L. S. (3 pages) of Robert 
Baron Clive, November 5, 1765 . .170 

John Ruskin.174 

From an old woodcut 

First Page of A. L. S. (3 pages) of John 
Ruskin to William Riddle, undated . 176 

Thomas De Quincey.182 

Last Page of A. L. S. (4 pages) of Thomas De 
Quincey, July 17,1837 . . . .184 

Thomas Carlyle.186 

First and Last Pages of A. L. S. (12 pages) of 
Thomas Carlyle to his Wife, undated 
but April, 1841.188 

William Makepeace Thackeray . . .192 

First Page of A. L. S. of William Makepeace 
Thackeray to William Harrison Ains¬ 
worth, January 13, 1857 . . . .194 

A. L. S. of William Makepeace Thackeray 
to James Fraser, July i, [1833] . .194 

Charles Dickens.196 

From the etching by Hollyer 

First Page of A. L. S. (4 pages) of Charles 
Dickens to Thomas Mitton, June 13,1865 . 196 

Richard Cobden.206 

From the engraving by Hollyer after a photograph 
by W. & D. Downey 




HUustrations 


xiii 


PAGE 

Last Page of A. L. S. (4 pages) of Richard 
Cobden, February 18,1864 . . . 208 

John Bright.210 

First and Last Pages of A. L. S. (4 pages) of 
John Bright to Horace Greeley, October 
1, 1864 ....... 212 

A. L. S. of Sir Francis Bernard, August 
8, 1761.236 

Sir Guy Carleton ..... 240 

From an etching by H. B. Hall 

First and Last Pages of A. L. S. of Sir Guy 
Carleton to General de Riedesel, June 
6, 1783.240 

Nathanael Greene.242 

From an engraving by R. Whitechurch, after the 
painting by R. Peale 

A. L. S. of Nathanael Greene to Colonel 
James Abele, May 25,1779 . . .242 

Benedict Arnold .244 

From an engraving by B. L. Provost after a draw¬ 
ing from life by Du Simitier 

First and Last Pages of A. L. S. of Benedict 
Arnold to Governor George Clinton, 
August 22,1780 ..... 244 

Bayard Taylor .256 

First Page of A. L. S. (3 pages) of Bayard 




XIV 


IHlustrations 


PAGE 

Taylor to James R. Osgood, December 
i7> 1870.258 

Oliver Wendell Holmes .... 262 

Last Page of A. L. S. (2 pages) of Oliver 
Wendell Holmes to Bayard Taylor, Sep¬ 
tember 1,1875.262 

Samuel Langhorne Clemens . . .264 

From the engraving by T. Cole after the painting by 
A. H. Thayer 

First and Last Pages of A. L. S. of Samuel 
Langhorne Clemens to Bayard Taylor, 
UNDATED ....... 264 

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow . . . 266 

From the engraving by S. Hollyer 

First Page of A. L. S. of Henry Wadsworth 
Longfellow to Bayard Taylor, Novem¬ 
ber 23, 1871.266 

James Russell Lowell . . . .268 

Last Page of A. L. S. of James Russell Low¬ 
ell to Bayard Taylor, August 24, 1870 268 

John Lothrop Motley .... 270 

First Page of A. L. S. (4 pages) of John 
Lothrop Motley to General Adam 
Badeau, December 24, 1868 . . . 270 

Nathaniel Hawthorne .... 272 

From a copper print 




Illustrations 


XV 


PAGE 

A. L. S. of Nathaniel Hawthorne, December 
io, 1850.272 

Thomas Bailey Aldrich .... 274 

From a steel engraving 

First Page of A. L. S. (2 pages) of Thomas 
Bailey Aldrich to General George P. 
Morris, July 26, no year .... 274 

Noah Webster .276 

From a steel engraving 

First Page of A. L. S. (2 pages) of Noah 
Webster, February 20,1843 . . . 276 












































































































•- 















































Rambles in Autograph Land 


CHAPTER I 

UNREAD BOOKS 

Unread Books—Books Commercially Valueless—Unappreciated 
Authors—Book Preferences—Why Collect Autographs?— 
Popular Errors about Them—Mr. Madan’s Deliverance— 
William Carew Hazlitt—Signature-gathering—Some English 
Collectors—Upcott—Dawson Turner—Gold win Smith’s 
Sneer—An English Autograph King—Newspaper Wisdom 
about Autographs. 

Lector benevole! for so 

They used to call you years ago— 

I can’t pretend to make you read 
The pages that to this succeed. 

Thus does a delightful lover of books begin 
the prologue of De Libris. I have misgivings 
about inducing the lector benevolus to read 
even this page, although it is graced and em¬ 
bellished by the words of Austin Dobson. 


i 



2 IRambles in Hutograpb lanb 


Many books are talked about and seldom 
read, and many are both read and talked 
about—but there is another sort which no 
one ever speaks of and no one ever reads. A 
book about autographs usually belongs to the 
last mentioned variety; perhaps it would not 
have been so a century or more ago, when 
there were those who actually bought and read 
the dreary “Essays on Taste,” about which 
the devoted bibliophile Robert Southey said: 
“There are still readers who have never read 
an Essay on Taste—and if they take my advice 
they never will; for they can no more improve 
their taste by so doing than they could improve 
their appetite or their digestion by studying 
a cookery book.” One would think that even 
autographic gossip would be more interesting. 

Only a few months ago I was told by the 
accomplished manager of a famous publishing 
house in New York that my writings probably 
had little commercial value. I did not find 
myself prepared to dispute an authoritative 
judgment coming from the business side of 
the publishing office. But when one reflects 
about some of the dreadful things which 




TUnreab Books 


3 


appear to have “commercial value,” such an 
assurance is not so devoid of flattery as it 
might seem to be at first blush. If one is 
inclined to take optimistic views of matters 
in general, there is cause of self-gratulation in 
being, like Katisha in the Mikado , “an acquired 
taste.” Any one who deliberately writes 
for the limited class known as “autograph 
collectors,” and who expects to be enrolled 
in the closing pages of The Bookman as a “best 
seller” is doomed to disappointment. He 
might better produce a volume on the Habits 
and Customs of Earthworms or a treatise on 
the Law of Contingent Remainders. If there 
be a distinction in writing for the few, he must 
be content with that, and with the consoling 
thought that it is like sitting down to dine 
with a small band of “choice spirits,” instead 
of going through the form of feasting at a 
Waldorf-Astoria banquet where a thousand 
men feed noisily to the accompaniment of an 
orchestra and listen to the laboured discourses, 
long drawn out, with which the diners are 
regaled towards the hour of midnight. It is 
not to be wondered at that autographic dis- 



4 Gambles in autograph Xanb 


quisitions should be little esteemed; those who 
like autographs generally know so much about 
the subject that they do not demand further 
enlightenment, and those who do not care 
for them are simply bored by a book about 
them; wherefore I have written this book. 

Writers whose works are unread usually 
find a dubious solace in the experience of 
George Meredith, whose “long and noble 
struggle against the inattention of the public,” 
as Mr. Gosse calls it, is known to most stu¬ 
dents of modern literature. In 1883 he wrote 
to some one who was begging for a copy of 
Vittoria: “The effect of public disfavour 
has been to make me indifferent to my works 
after they have gone through their course of 
castigation.” Mr. Gosse alludes to the as¬ 
sertion that “the movement in favour of him 
began in America,” and adds, “if so, more 
praise to American readers.” But Meredith 
devoted himself chiefly to fiction and it must 
be a low order of fiction which does not get 
itself read by somebody at some time; more¬ 
over there are not many Merediths. Still, 
notwithstanding his present fame, it cannot 




tlnreat* ffioofcs 


5 


be said that in general popularity he ranks 
with Arnold Bennett or with the author of 
The Rosary. Recently an intelligent woman 
asked me if he was the man who wrote Lucile , 
which reminded me of the personage I met in 
Washington who alluded to Henry James as 
“that two horsemen fellow/’ 

There is not much dispute about the fact 
that the ordinary reader prefers to read what 
repeats and embodies his own beliefs and 
opinions, and not the opposing views of the 
writer. Ruskin thought that a reader in 
laying down a book was apt to say, “How good 
that is—that is exactly what I think,” and 
Mr. Benson appears to be satisfied that 
Ruskin was right and that the best authors 
are not those who tell us what they themselves 
believe, but those who show us what we be¬ 
lieve. We love to find, expressed in print and 
by aptly chosen words, what has been lying, 
formless perhaps, in our own minds, and we 
are pleased with the sensible author who agrees 
with us in our opinions. Multitudes resemble 
good Joe Gargery and are enraptured when 
they do come upon a “J-O-Joe,” exclaiming, 



6 IRambles in autograph Uanb 


“ there at last is a J-O-Joe” and becoming 
aware of “how interesting reading is.” There 
are many reasons why this contribution to 
literature must, in the nature of things, find 
few readers; still it will belong to a class which 
every one likes to belong to—the majority. 
Some people pretend that they prefer to be 
in the minority, and occasionally I affect that 
pose myself, but to be wholly candid, it is not 
altogether a comfortable one. It is a means 
now and then of making an obscure person 
conspicuous. I knew a respectable lady who, 
when asked that old question, “Which is 
heavier, a pound of feathers or a pound of 
lead?” answered with a sniff of conscious su¬ 
periority, 11 Some people would say ‘a pound of 
lead/ but I say ‘ a pound of feathers. ’ ” I have 
often reflected on the disappointment of that 
solitary elector who cast the single vote against 
James Monroe for the Presidency in 1820; 
no one seems to remember his name, 1 although 
a delver in the chronicles of that time may 
no doubt discover it easily; but his hope of 
immortality proved to be delusive. 

1 1 believe it was William Plumer: but who remembers Plumer? 




‘ITlnreafc Books 


7 


There is a certain dignity about a book 
which has been read by only two or three 
adventurous beings; it becomes an aristocratic 
sort of book, unsullied by vulgar popularity, 
but like many aristocrats, not overburdened 
with income. Naturally, books which boast 
no readers are not particularly lucrative, unless 
we except law treatises, which are said to 
“pay,” because every public law-library must 
have a copy and the prices are tremendous. 
Views differ about the matter of writing for 
pecuniary profit. Montaigne declared that 
“to pretend to literature for the sake of gain 
was a meanness unworthy the grace and favour 
of the muses,” which is consoling to the unap¬ 
preciated. On the other hand, Doctor John¬ 
son said that “no man but a blockhead ever 
wrote except for money.” This judgment 
has been successfully assailed by Professor 
Walter Raleigh, but I accept it. What of it? 
Johnson wrote much but gained little money. 
It is better to be a blockhead and write for 
one’s own amusement than it is to be a wise 
man and to write only for money—and not 
get the money. 




8 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


Some years ago I read in an English peri¬ 
odical the sage and indulgent remark that “the 
love of collecting autographs, if it has some¬ 
times been pursued without much taste or 
meaning, has never sunk to the rank of a mere 
mania, like the tulip mania of the seventeenth 
and the postage-stamp mania of the nineteenth 
century.” This is indeed gracious and con¬ 
descending. The profound observer leaves 
us uncertain whether the “ love” or the “col¬ 
lecting” is “pursued”; but we should be 
grateful for the patronising utterance. Why 
do we collect autographs? Almost every col¬ 
lector can give peculiar and specific reasons; 
I could give a number, but I will refrain from 
advancing more than one. A certain al¬ 
leged reason is a favourite with the un¬ 
initiated and it is fictitious. Southey touched 
upon it, when, about the year 1814, he 
wrote: 

Those who know that the word physiognomy is not 
derived from phiz, and infer from that knowledge that 
the science is not confined to the visage alone, have 
extended it to handwriting, also, and hence it has 
become fashionable in this age of collectors to collect 
the autographs of remarkable persons. 




'Iflnreab Books 


9 


I myself have never encountered an auto¬ 
graph collector who cared a denarius about 
a comparison of handwritings, or who accumu¬ 
lated his treasures in order to study character 
from them. The head-hunter of Borneo does 
not gather his specimens for the purpose of 
studying phrenology. The main reason why 
we collect is—that we enjoy it. 

The English periodical says: 

There is always a pleasure in contemplating the 
handwriting of persons whom you respect or admire, 
and the mind is led insensibly to associate certain 
characteristics with handwriting from reading those 
same characteristics in lives or faces. 

For my part, I am convinced that there is 
very little revelation of character in hand¬ 
writing. Our English friend calls attention 
to the “neat hand of Rogers,” as “calm, 
laboured, and regular as his poetry,” and 
the “scraggy, sprawling hand” of Byron, 
“as uneven, dashing, and unlovely as his life;” 
the fact being that Rogers was brought up to 
business and Byron was never brought up at all. 
Indeed, in his very next paragraph, the peri¬ 
odical man admits that “there are many kinds 




io IRamblea in Hutograpb Xanb 


of handwriting which do not accord with what 
we know of their authors.” There are so 
many influences which affect a man’s penman¬ 
ship—the quality of the paper, ink, and pen, 
the circumstances under which he writes, 
early environment, whether he is hurried or 
not, the occasion for writing . 1 A man often 
imitates in boyhood the chirography of his 
father or of some admired relative, and never 
changes the style in any material respect. 
The feminine quality of Mr. Cleveland’s 
handwriting furnishes no guide to the study 
of his nature. Murat’s was without any 
ostentation; Robespierre’s was small and lady¬ 
like; Macaulay’s was unformed, straggling, 
and slovenly. John Hancock signed the 
Declaration in a big bold way but was not 
famous for bravery; Stephen Hopkins’s hand 
trembled as he wrote, not from fright but 
from physical infirmity. Such illustrations 
might be multiplied almost indefinitely. 

The queer observations about autograph 

1 Disraeli was right when he wrote to an applicant for an 
autograph: “I have no great faith in the theory of judging of 
character from handwriting. My autograph depends upon my 
pen, which is at present a very bad one.” 




Unreal Books 


II 


collecting made by men of education and of a 
literary disposition are often irritating and 
occasionally amusing. Mr. Falconer Madan, 
whose gravity is appalling, produced a book 
some years ago called Books in Manuscript 
in which he imparted to us this gratifying 
information: 

The collection of autograph letters has a great and 
natural attraction for many persons. Instead of a 
single author’s works in manuscript, the collector of 
autographs obtains specimens of the handwriting of 
.any number of celebrities who may belong to a period 
or nation or class in which he is specially interested, 
or may represent general fame. For him all who can 
write are authors, and his ambition is to obtain an 
a. 1. s. (autograph letter signed) or at least a signature 
of all who come within the scope of his designs. 

This is not what we should expect from a per¬ 
sonage who admits on his title-page that he is 
an M. A., a Fellow of Brazenose College, and 
Lecturer on Mediaeval Paleography in the 
University of Oxford. I trust that he knows 
more about mediaeval paleography than he 
seems to know about autograph collectors; 
perhaps his researches in that fruitful field 
were too laborious to permit him to learn 





i2 IRambles in autograph Xant> 


what an autograph collector really is. We 
thank you, kind sir, but we do not regard “all 
who write as authors ”; we have no “ambition” 
for a mere “signature,” and we do not prefer 
an author’s letter to a manuscript of a book of 
his, being more than willing to surrender even 
a good A. L. S. of Thackeray or of Tennyson 
for, let us say, the manuscript of Vanity Fair 
or of In Memoriam. 

William Carew Hazlitt says of George 
Daniel, that he “did not obey the ordinary 
instinct of a collector whose zest is derived 
from acquiring, not from possessing.” It is 
true that some feel more delight in the hunt¬ 
ing than in the result of it, but that is not an 
attribute peculiar to the collector. Sheridan 
confessed to Grenville that pursuit always 
allured him rather than possession, and Van 
Brugh in The Confederacy makes Clarissa say: 
“I always know what I lack, but I am never 
pleased with what I have. The want of a 
thing is perplexing enough, but the possession 
of it is intolerable.” We all know people of 
that disposition, but they are in the minority. 
This Hazlitt, very self-conceited and pain- 




Tflnreat) Books 


13 


fully dull, was incapable of comprehending 
the collector. He could not understand how 
the pleasure of the search and the enjoyment 
of the prize itself could coexist. Occasionally 
the thing acquired may be a disappointment 
and the fish not so imposing as we were led 
to anticipate when the struggle for his capture 
was in progress, but it is absurd to found a 
generalisation on such isolated cases. 

Fortunately, all people do not find pleasure 
in the same things, and sometimes one man’s 
• fancies are regarded with scornful contempt by 
other men who doubtless have hobbies of 
their own. It has been my lot to elicit sneers, 
particularly from the intellectual giants who 
“do” the book-notices for Western news¬ 
papers, and to receive some acrid criticism 
from people nearer home, because I like to 
write and to chat about what are called 
“autographs.” To a certain order of mind 
the fondness for autographs seems childish, 
inane, puerile to the last degree. Persons 
who are afflicted with that kind of mind think 
that the pursuit of gathering autographs— 
and they make no distinction between sig- 



i4 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


natures, manuscripts, letters, or historical 
documents—is as senseless as the collecting 
of paper-dolls or of postcards. As Doctor 
George Birkbeck Hill says: “To many people 
the word 'autograph’ means nothing more 
than the signature of a man more or less 
eminent. A collection of autographs they 
regard as only a collection of signatures.” 
Usually this mental attitude is the result of 
defective education or of imperfect informa¬ 
tion, and one cannot help feeling compassion 
for the victims, who are themselves inno¬ 
cent enough in their folly and suffer from 
ignorance for which personally they are little 
to blame. 

Scott and Davey, in their pretematurally 
solemn Guide to the Collector , are very serious 
about this subject. They say: 

The beginner must, however, cast aside many er¬ 
roneous ideas concerning autographs, some of which 
are very common and have been long sanctioned by 
fashion. In the first place, he must learn to regard as 
valueless mere signatures of individuals cut out from 
letters or documents; for with few and rare exceptions, 
such are never admitted into the portfolio of the 
collector. 




TTlnreat) Books 


15 


Signatures not “cut out” but written by re¬ 
quest may be a little better, but the principle 
is the same. 

When the world has once made up its mind 
to be wrong on any subject, particularly one 
which is merely literary or aesthetic, no amount 
of written or printed remonstrance will con¬ 
vince it of its error. You may now and then 
effect a temporary lodgment in the mind of 
some isolated individual, but the people who 
think about it at all—there are not many— 
will struggle through life under the delusion 
that “ signatures ” are the be-all and end-all 
of the collector’s existence. I know an emi¬ 
nent American collector whose feelings have 
been so wrought upon by this popular mis¬ 
apprehension that he would never attempt to 
make up a set of “The Signers” because he 
could not secure anything but a signature in 
the case of Thomas Lynch, Jr. 

Ours is a new civilisation in this country 
and the material things appeal most to the 
multitude. It may be a more beneficial and 
progressive civilisation than that of England, 
but we do not find there such conspicu- 




16 IRambles in Hutograpb lanb 


ous manifestations of defective culture. For 
many reasons England is not, at least for an 
American, so pleasant a land to live in as ours, 
but one finds there more tolerance for the 
autograph lover than in this land of “triumph¬ 
ant democracy.” 

An excellent example of an English collector 
was William Upcott, who collected many 
things, but gained less fame for his coins and 
prints than for his autograph letters and 
documents. He called his house, No. 102 
Upper Street, Islington, “Autograph Cottage,” 
and when he died in 1845 he left thirty-two 
thousand specimens, comprising papers by 
which, says Doctor Scott, “the history of a 
large portion of Europe during several cen¬ 
turies might have been illuminated.” This 
collection was sold in 1846 (not in 1836, as 
Scott says) and most of it was acquired by 
the British Museum. There was also Dawson 
Turner, the botanist, who not only had over 
forty thousand letters, besides illuminated 
manuscripts and important documents which 
were sold in 1859, but one hundred and fifty 
volumes of manuscripts and letters which 



TTlnreai) Boohs 


1 7 


were disposed of in 1853, five years before 
his death. 

In the “ collect ion” there is a letter of 
Turner’s, concerning the recent death of 
Upcott and enclosing a drawing by Turner’s 
daughter: 

Dear Sir— 

When a man has little to give he must be allowed 
to act wisely in following the old Latin Proverb & 
by giving that little quickly endeavour to stamp it 
with an artificial value to which it would intrinsically 
have no claim. With this feeling I lose no time in 
sending you my daughter’s drawing of our late friend 
& apprehending you may possibly have his catalogue 
or some other of his publications in which you may 
like to insert it, I add a duplicate copy. For myself, 
the dressing up of my books with portraits & auto¬ 
graphs has always been a pleasure to me. I have 
thought I could read a volume with more satisfaction 
& feel myself to a certain degree personally ac¬ 
quainted with the author, if I knew how he looked 
& what sort of a hand he wrote. In this particular 
therefore I trust I may have the opportunity of amus¬ 
ing you when you favour me with a visit here, which 
you must do, now Yarmouth is brought within 7 
hours of London. But three years ago, & the journey 
occupied 18. I can show you nothing like the collec¬ 
tion that you & I have seen at Islington—perhaps 
not one third in point of quantity & still less in re¬ 
lation to rarity & curiosity; but I have the vanity to 



18 IRambles in autograph “Earth 


believe I can very much make amends by superiority 
of arrangement, without which all other considera¬ 
tions lose half their worth. Of poor Upcott I suppose 
we shall now hear little or nothing further till his 
shelves & cupboards & boxes are emptied & Sothe¬ 
by’s or Evans’ or Fletcher’s catalogue gives us some 
notion of their contents. I say “some notion,” & 
I use the phrase advisedly; for to estimate them 
aright required that singular knowledge & power of 
words which I never knew any other person possess in 
an equal degree. Were I to be called to Town, I 
wd certainly go to his late residence, where I hope I 
might see his cousin; & she, I am persuaded, would be 
glad to speak to me in a manner the most confiden¬ 
tial. Her bearing, as far as I have seen, was always 
respectable & respectful: & I shd be glad to find 
she was able to establish by relationship any right to 
what he has left behind him. The testamentary dis¬ 
position in favour of Miss Berry I presume is not in¬ 
vested with the forms requisite to make it legal. 

I am, my dear sir, your much obliged & faithful 

Dawson Turner. 

Yarmouth, 6 Octr., 1845. 

In thinking, with wonder, about these enor¬ 
mous collections of Englishmen, we Ameri¬ 
cans must remember that there must have 
been many included in them which would not 
arouse our cupidity. A writer in a magazine 
forty years ago says that as a collector he had 
“ carefully examined whole volumes of Up- 




Tainreat) Books 


19 


cottian Dukes, Marquises, Earls, and Lords, 
arranged in perfect autographic order, without 
finding a specimen worthy of a place in an 
American collection, and had seen without 
emotion such volumes knocked down for 
little more than the price of the binding.'* 
Such uninteresting accumulations are as un¬ 
attractive to us as a gathering of the autographs 
of American Congressmen would be to an 
Englishman—and I can scarcely conceive of 
anything more unattractive than that. 

Doctor Raffles of Liverpool was another 
famous amateur, who had the first draft of 
the hymn “From Greenland’s icy mountains,” 
and a complete set of the Signers of the De¬ 
claration of Independence, as well as Burke’s 
notes for his speech against Warren Hastings. 
Mr. Alfred Morrison’s collection almost defies 
description. The sales catalogues of the 
Sotheby house, issued at intervals, reveal the 
existence of many others who add dignity to 
the pursuit. We have been increasing in 
numbers in the United States, although prices 
have grown to such an extent that only a man 
of wealth can afford to buy the best, and com- 




20 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


paratively few of our men of wealth have the 
time or the disposition to become collectors 
of autographs. 

But even Englishmen, and distinguished 
ones at that, sometimes feel it incumbent 
upon them to cast opprobrium upon the au¬ 
tograph lover. Goldwin Smith, for example, 
who was a sort of self-exiled Englishman, in 
his sketch of “Social Life in London,” re¬ 
fers to Richard Monckton Milnes as “a great 
and most successful collector of autographs,” 
but cannot refrain from adding, “To a col¬ 
lector of autographs everything is moral.” 
This silly generalisation is vouchsafed to us 
merely because Lord Houghton did not answer 
an inquiry as to how he obtained a certain 
paper signed by General Grant in his cadet 
days. The question was impudent, and 
Smith might as well have asked Milnes how 
he obtained the watch in his pocket. It was 
none of Smith’s business, and the omission 
to reply to his insolent query was wholly 
justifiable. Smith’s absurd conclusion that 
the paper must have been obtained by dis¬ 
creditable means is a characteristic manifesta- 



Unreab HBoofcs 


21 


tion of one of those qualities which rendered 
it advisable for the person who announced it 
to become a resident of Canada. It is as 
gratuitously false as it would be to say that all 
ex-professors of Oxford are cads. Mr. Smith 
simply thought it smart to bestow a kick on 
autograph collectors; Milnes was dead and 
there was therefore no opportunity for a 
rejoinder. 

I fear that autograph lovers are often mis¬ 
judged because there are a few who pretend 
to belong to their ranks, mere impostors, who 
bring discredit upon the true disciples of the 
cult: and unluckily, these reprobates appear to 
gain easiest access to the columns of the press, 
as charlatans, political or otherwise, frequently 
do. Take for example this paragraph which 
I found some time ago in a reputable news¬ 
paper of New York, which contains more 
abomination than I ever saw compressed in 
so small a space. 

If a certain individual in London, who styles 
himself “the autograph king of England” ever wants 
to become an international forger, he has a fine stock 
in trade to start with. Mr. B-proudly boasts that 




22 IRatnbles In autograph lanb 


he has five thousand signatures of great and near¬ 
great people, the list including the Queen of Roumania, 
the Pope, ex-President Roosevelt, Admiral Togo, Mr. 
Asquith, Mr. Balfour, Lord Roberts, Sir Hector 
Macdonald, Sir Henry Irving, Dr. Jameson, and Lord 
Salisbury. “One of the features of my collection,” 
he says, “is that no influence has been used to obtain 
a single autograph. Every one has been gained by 
perseverance and the originality of my request.” 


An “autograph king” with five thousand 
signatures! Heaven save the mark! A money 
king with five thousand brass farthings would 
be a Croesus beside him. Words fail to 
describe the appalling insignificance of a 
“collector” with a lot of signatures obtained 
by request, whether original or not. For a 
few pennies he could procure from a dealer 
signatures of every one of the people whose 
names he gives. One well-known dealer in 
New York advertises that he will send fifty 
good ones for a dollar. The declaration that 
“one of the features” of this remarkable 
mass of rubbish is that “no influence was used” 
to obtain any signature, reminds us of M. 
Prud’ homme, who, when a cane—I think it 
was a cane—was given to him by some ad- 




Tllnreab ffioofts 


23 


mirers, began his speech of thanks by saying: 
“This cane is the proudest day of my life.” 

The mere fact that the royal B-“proudly 

boasts ” is enough to betray his lack of genuine¬ 
ness. The true collector never boasts; he 
may chuckle mildly now and then over some 
unusual letter or document, but he is far too 
dignified to “boast,” which is vulgar. Yet 
there are credulous beings who read these 
rigmaroles in their morning paper, and upon 
them form their erroneous opinions of the 
autograph collector. I pass by without com¬ 
ment the absurd suggestion about “an inter¬ 
national forger.” It is too cheap and common 
a slur to deserve notice. Our newspaper 
people have grown so fond of spelling crime 
out of everything that they would detect it 
in a Convocation of Bishops. Where auto¬ 
graphs are concerned they do not exhibit 
their customary wisdom; that is not to be 
wondered at, for they have so many other and 
more weighty and criminal matters to consider 
that the subject of autographs must appear 
to them to be trifling. Charged as they are 
with the responsibility of regulating the 




24 TRamblee in Hutograpb Xanb 


affairs of the nation and the morals of the 
people, they cannot waste much effort on 
autographs. 

The daily newspaper is a veritable Warwick 
and is constantly setting up a new autograph 
king, usually a gentleman with an album of 
signatures. Since the coronation of B-, an¬ 

other has been elevated to the throne, which 
is growing overcrowded. On July i, 1912, 
a clever New York journal devoted nearly a 

column to the royal career of one L-B- 

of Berlin, “the most indefatigable autograph 
collector in the world”; all newspaper heroes 
are “the most”—whatever it may be—in the 
world. If a man dies in what used to be 
known as “the Annexed District,” the obit¬ 
uary notice proclaims that he was “the 
oldest scissors-grinder” or “most extensive 
cat’s-meat purveyor” in the Bronx. We are 
informed that the royal German is “coming 
to London,” having “spent over $50,000 on 
his hobby” and “travelled all over the world 
to secure desired signatures”—in the Desert 
of Sahara and the rubber country of the 
Amazon perhaps. The fruits of his gigantic 







Tllnreab Books 


25 


labours are all contained in a “ little fat volume 
bound in red cloth.” We are further told 
that “Prince Roland Bonaparte has called 
L—— B——■ the king of autograph collectors.” 
The habit of making dubious kings seems to run 

in the Bonaparte family. L-B-need 

not have paid so much for his crown; for 
$50,000 he should have been able to procure at 
least five hundred thousand signatures, and 
fifty thousand ought to be enough to make 
a newspaper autograph king of him. 

In one of the best morning journals of New 
York I found recently—in the editorial de¬ 
partment too—this deliverance: 

At a current sale of autograph letters and manu¬ 
scripts in London the prices range pretty low—a lot 
of letters, for instance, from Queen Victoria, the 
Duchess of Gloucester, the Duke of Wellington, 
Bulwer Lytton, Charles Dickens, John Ruskin, and 
Mrs. Siddons, with signatures of Prince Albert and 
Sir Walter Scott, went for fifty dollars. 

On the other hand, at a Paris auction, the jewelled 
ornaments and coffee cup stands of the Sultan Abdul 
Hamid were contended for with much spirit and long 
purses. Can it be that the interest in polite letters 
is being slowly but surely submerged in the rising 
tide of interest in jewels representing cold cash? You 
can’t wear an autograph letter as a pendant; the MS. 








26 iRambles In Hutograpb lanb 


of Vanity Fair or Paradise Lost , even, would n’t look 
like a sable coat. Emeralds and rubies and pearls, 
these are the enduring treasures sought by the modern 
“collector.” 

I question the writer’s facts. As to the 
sale of “ a lot of letters ” at the price mentioned, 
I think the writer must have been grossly 
misinformed, or he mixed up pounds and 
dollars. Granting that there was a sale of 
autographs at that price,—which is not likely, 
in London, where in the last year or two prices 
have soared unreasonably,—they could not 
have been real letters. “ Letters” of Queen 
Victoria, Charles Dickens, Mrs. Siddons, and 
the Duke of Wellington are not put up for 
sale, together, in one lot. A letter of Mrs. 
Siddons would bring at least half the amount 
mentioned. I was obliged to pay five guineas 
for this one of hers written to George Hardinge, 
the lawyer and author. It is not dated. 

My dear Mr. Hardinge, I [ saw] Lord Fosbrook 
again last night and he seem’d to say that you shod 
have a box let who wd go without. I will certainly 
use all my interest with Mr. Linley but I fear I have 
no great influence there—had I not been distracted 
with ten thousand different things I wou’d have sent 
my sweet Mrs. H. a million of thanks for her kind 




Unreab »oohs 


27 


letter but I am stark mad and my soul grows sick with 
trouble. I have found an opportunity however of get- 
ing thro’ allmost all your defence of Lord Camelford. I 
never was more interested in my life but what grati¬ 
fication can all that a poor ignorant woman can say 
in your praise give you who must have receiv’d the 
highest encomiums from the good, the wise and the 
great, none of whom however can in good will excell 
yr S. Sid. 

Give my love to my dear Mrs. H. and God bless 
you both. 

The lady was theatrically profuse in super¬ 
latives but sparing in her signature, which 
seems inappropriate to the Tragic Muse. 

If the things which “fetched” fifty dollars 
were “letters” they must have been in 
amazingly bad condition, of no intrinsic in¬ 
terest, or mere “album specimens” which 
are of small account. They may have been 
of doubtful authenticity. But I am inclined 
to adopt my original hypothesis; in all prob¬ 
ability the tale is best described by the “short, 
ugly word” which has become almost sacred 
to Presidential or ex-Presidential uses. It 
was evidently “lugged in” as a text for the 
journalistically profound reflections contained 
in the closing portion of the paragraph. 




CHAPTER II 

FACSIMILES AND FORGERIES 

The Price Question—Apologies of Collectors—Facsimiles and 
Forgeries—The Milton Receipts—How do you Know it is 
Genuine?—George Birkbeck Hill’s Forged Washington— 
The Case of Robert Spring—Vrain-Lucas—Sir David 
Brewster’s letter on Newton. 

The reference to prices leads me to confess 
that there is one occasional weakness of a 
collector which gives me a little twinge of 
pain; his disposition to dwell upon the cost 
and the market value of the letter or manu¬ 
script. In my humble judgment, it takes 
away much of the charm and sentiment of col¬ 
lecting and destroys true enjoyment. Others 
may not so regard it; they may consider that 
the payment of a large sum for a choice 
specimen is a badge of distinction, and the 
fact that some one else is willing to give for it 
a larger sum furnishes a measure of its rarity 

28 


jfacsimUee ant> ^forgeries 


29 


and value; they feel like the millionaire 
who lavishes thousands in the purchase of a 
Mazarin Bible, and has the glory of owning 
one of the most expensive books in the world. 
More commonly, however, the pride is in the 
thought of having made a shrewd bargain, for 
collectors are more inclined to boast of having 
paid a small price for a valuable autograph 
than of having paid a large one. But there is 
an element of the sordid about it all, and 
while I have no intention of parading my 
egotism or of bragging about my own tran¬ 
scendent virtues, I assert that I seldom keep 
any record of what a letter or a manuscript 
cost me, and have no idea what it will ‘ ‘ fetch ” 
at the auction sale, which will concern my 
executors far more than it will ever concern 
me. Naturally, it is otherwise with those who 
are engaged in the business of dealing in 
autographs. To these, of course, autographs 
are articles of commerce, but it is strange to 
me that a professed lover of them can so look 
upon them. I referred to the money value of 
the bogus ‘‘king’s” signatures merely to show 
how easy it is to make a ‘ ‘ collection ’ ’ of them 



30 Gambles in Hutograpb Hanb 


without self-humiliation and the pestering of 
notable personages. 

According to my way of thinking, compari¬ 
son and discussion of prices is one of the draw¬ 
backs to the enjoyment of the genial Mr. 
Broadley’s Chats on Autographs. Few of us 
care much about other people’s bargains; and 
after a little time the old prices afford no 
criterion for estimating market values. An 
experience of over twenty-five years has 
convinced me that it is impossible to find any 
standard in such matters. Many amateurs 
have puzzled me sorely by submitting letters 
and asking me to tell them what they ought 
to bring. Of course, the answer must be a 
mere approximation. One may safely say 
that an A. L. S. of George is worth more 
than an L. S. of Booker T., and a Thomas 
Lynch, Jr., more than a Robert Morris. But as 
a rule, the price will depend a good deal on the 
anxiety of the buyer or the necessity of the seller. 

I do not know why I should follow the 
example of almost all those who write about 
autographs—offer excuses for the collector and 
confess some of his failings. Let the poor 




facsimiles ant> forgeries 31 

creature who attacks us formulate his charges 
and produce his evidence before we put in our 
defence. After all, who is to decide the case? 
Certainly not the prosecutors, and no one 
expects to convince them. To the multitude, 
who know little and care less about the whole 
subject, there is not much use in offering 
argument. I suppose that we who are of the 
brotherhood indulge in this sort of mingled 
apology, protest, and lamentation merely for 
one another’s comfort and consolation. If 
people generally will not tell us what fine 
fellows we are, we can at least tell one another 
so, and gain thereby about as much profit as 
we would if we had won over the populace. 
There is, however, one of our number who 
preserves a cheery optimism. Mr. Broadley, 
in his Chats on Autographs , is never on the 
defensive; he glories in his “fad” and rides 
triumphantly over the prostrate bodies of those 
who dare meet his conquering lance. 

One danger we are all of us liable to run, 
but not so often as one might suppose, and 
even that is to be feared only by the careless or 
the inexperienced. I mean the danger of 




32 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


being deceived by facsimiles and by cleverly 
executed forgeries. As to facsimiles, the eru¬ 
dite collector may laugh, saying that only a 
mere tyro can be misled by one. I have been 
“collecting” for a quarter of a century and I 
flattered myself that I was no longer a novice. 
Yet it was only a year ago that, on casually 
examining a copy of the Letters of Lord 
Chesterfield in my library, I found, carefully 
pasted on a cut flyleaf in the very beginning 
of the book, a letter in the unmistakable 
chirography of the noble Lord. As the cut¬ 
ting and the pasting looked like my own work, 
and as the letter itself had the appearance of 
an original, I thought that I must have in¬ 
serted it at a time when I was afflicted with 
the mania of adding autographs to my books, 
although I wondered that I had been guilty of 
thus misusing so valuable a letter. I decided 
to remove it from the volume, but on examin¬ 
ing the table of contents I was led to the 
painful discovery that my letter was only a 
facsimile and one of the illustrations of the 
very book I was handling. If I had been 
buying the letter I should have detected its 




facsimiles ant> forgeries 33 


true character by feeling the surface, especially 
the address, where the reproduction of the 
broken seal was palpably facsimile work; 
at least I flatter myself to that extent. It was 
a humiliating experience. 

Quite frequently an innocent purchaser is 
misled by facsimiles given by old magazines, 
for they have a deceptive appearance of age 
and are generally very well executed. Doctor 
Scott furnishes an example in the famous 
Milton receipts, one for £5, on account of the 
copyright of Paradise Lost , and one by Milton’s 
widow for £8 in payment for her interest in 
that copyright. It seems that facsimiles 
were published in the Gentleman's Magazine 
for July, 1822. What purported to be the 
Milton receipt was found in the manuscripts 
of Mr. Dawson Turner, and was sold by 
Puttick & Simpson in 1859, for the respectable 
siim of £46 is., to an American. It had the 
hallmark afforded by the fact that it came 
from a famous collection. Doctor Scott 
leaves us in doubt, however, about the true 
genesis of this spurious paper. He says, at 
first, that the original was “borrowed from Sir 




34 IRambles in autograph Xanfc 


Thomas Cullum” by Mr. Turner and that a 
copy was traced from this original by Turner’s 
sister, a thing, he adds, which “any amateur 
would naturally have done”; but I question 
the truth of that assertion. A page further on 
he refers to the magazine facsimiles and 
observes that “by comparing them with the 
Dawson Turner tracings, it was at once evi¬ 
dent that they were the sources whence Mr. 
Turner had taken his copies.” If so, what 
becomes of the tale about borrowing the 
originals from Sir Thomas Cullum? How¬ 
ever, either story contains a warning. When¬ 
ever I discover a facsimile or a copy among 
my humble belongings, I put a mark upon it 
so that, however unimportant it may be, in 
comparison with a Milton document, no one 
can be mistaken about it. 

Considering the disposition of innocent 
buyers to accept copies as originals, I think 
that all facsimiles, which are at all likely to 
be deceptive, should be branded in some such 
way as publishers are accustomed to employ 
now to deface the copies of prints given in 
their portrait catalogues. 




facsimiles ant> forgeries 35 


Mr. Broadley has an interesting chapter on 
forgeries and Scott devotes many pages to 
that subject. The non-collector is fond of 
asking, “How do you know it is genuine?” 
There are many answers to that question, so 
many that I shall not attempt to give them 
here. One may be reasonably sure that the 
danger of forgery is ordinarily limited to cases 
of rare, important, and expensive letters and 
manuscripts, although the forger finds a 
fruitful field in brief inscriptions and signa¬ 
tures in old books. If you do not have the 
training and experience necessary to deter¬ 
mine their genuineness, or the requisite time 
to study ink, paper, water-marks, documents 
of admitted authenticity, and the like, you 
must trust to the expert and reputable dealer, 
who is scrupulously careful in such matters, 
although sometimes innocently led into error 
as in the case of the Milton receipt. 

Dr. George Birkbeck Hill, in his interesting 
Talks About Autographs , unconsciously dis¬ 
closes the fact that he was the unsuspecting 
victim of a forgery. He laments that he had 
but two American autographs, one, however, 




36 Gambles in autograph Xanb 


being that of George Washington. “In my 
earliest childhood, ” said the scholarly Eng¬ 
lishman, “my father instilled into me such a 
veneration of that great man, that, when I was 
a schoolboy of the age of eight or nine, I once 
angered my little comrades by crying out, 
4 1 wish I was an American, for then I should 
be a countryman of George Washington. 
Then he gives us the text of his Washington 
autograph in full, an order for the payment of 
money, “but” he adds, “it is all in Washing¬ 
ton’s hand and is the more interesting as it 
was written in the last year of his life.” So 
pleased with it is the good doctor that he 
presents a facsimile. Any expert will see at 
once that it is the reproduction of a forgery. 
The signature of Washington was invariably 
bold and firm, but this one is wavering and 
uncertain. There is an angularity about the 
letters of the document which is absent in 
the genuine writings, where the letters are 
well rounded. In fact, it is exactly like many 
of the Washington cheques forged by the 
noted Robert Spring, who achieved dishonour¬ 
able fame enough to be included in Apple- 




facsimiles ant) forgeries 


37 


ton’s Cyclopcedia of American Biography. Mr. 
Bowden, Mr. Bums, and Mr. Benjamin, three 
well-known experts in New York, pronounced 
it spurious at a glance. But Dr. Hill died 
without knowing of the imposition and per¬ 
haps there was no great harm done. At all 
events he paid nothing for it; as he says, he 
never bought an autograph. 

Spring was a notorious character and some 
time I hope to see a full account of his forgeries. 
It will make an interesting chapter in auto- 
graphiana. Something about him was pub¬ 
lished in the Collector of April, 1912, and also 
in the American Antiquarian Magazine of 
May, 1888. He was tried in Philadelphia, for 
the offence of selling forged autographs of 
Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, and other 
American worthies. His method was to get 
possession of genuine letters and trace them on 
old paper cut from contemporary books, or 
to stain the paper with coffee-grounds. He 
transferred the field of his operations to 
Canada, where, assuming the alias of “Emma 
Harding,” he was quite successful. Thence 
he went South, where he took the name of 





38 TRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


'‘Fanny Jackson,” an alleged daughter of 
Stonewall Jackson, but his business there was 
unprofitable and he betook himself to England. 
He was in due course detected and convicted. 
“His plea before the Court, ” says Scott, “was 
the usual one of all autograph forgers—that 
he was doing no harm to any one, and indeed 
never had done a dishonourable action in his 
life, and only imagined he was innocently 
contributing to the gratification of the amiable 
weakness of those who are fond of autographs.’ * 
I do not know how such a defence was re¬ 
garded by an English court, but it is very 
much like old Bob Hart’s plea of self-defence 
when accused of killing a sheep. However 
efficacious it was, Spring somehow returned 
to Philadelphia, where, the inmate of a hospital, 
he died in poverty in 1876. 

The works of Mr. Spring are encountered 
from time to time, for no one ever feels dis¬ 
posed to destroy even a suspected autograph, 
but Washington cheques and other small 
Washington documents are regarded by the 
wary as unworthy of absolute confidence. 
A gentleman in Massachusetts, who combines 




facsimiles anb forgeries 39 


a taste for autographs with a lively sense of 
humour, recently related to me the tale of his 
Spring experience. Some years ago, in a 
casual shop in Boston, he found a “ George 
Washington, ’’ the text of which read: ‘ 1 Head¬ 
quarters, Bergen County, Sept. 5, 1780. 

Permission is granted to Mr. Ryerson and his 
negro man Dick, to pass and repass the picket 
at Ramapo. ” He was a little doubtful about 
it, but yielded to the blandishments of the 
shopkeeper and invested five dollars in the 
purchase. Becoming suspicious that it was 
a “Spring,” he was confirmed in his distrust 
by finding that a neighbour of his had just 
picked up, in Indiana, a pass “written by 
George Washington” for Mr. Ryerson and his 
man Dick. Not long after, at a Boston sale, 
another Ryerson-Dick pass turned up and 
brought $25.00. The purchaser submitted it 
to divers authorities, some of whom thought 
it genuine, but the best judges denounced 
it unhesitatingly as a “Spring” product. 
Within the past six months a Ryerson-Dick 
pass has been advertised in an autograph maga¬ 
zine in New York at the price of $25.00. My 




40 TRamblee in autograph Xanb 


friend writes: “I have thought it would be a 
good idea to call a convention of all owners of 
copies of this pass, to meet on the banks of the 
Ramapo, and tell how they got caught.” 

So the results of Spring’s ingenuity endure. 
His history contains a lesson to the heedless to 
avoid the people who are forced by “ straitened 
circumstances” to part with valuable family 
papers, and who conduct their nefarious traffic 
mainly by correspondence; for that was the 
method by which the spurious writings usually 
got into circulation. It is odd that men, 
who should know better, are so often deluded 
into buying bogus autographs; the victims are 
found among those whom one would scarcely 
suspect of blind credulity. The prices asked 
are usually suspiciously low, and mankind 
is disposed to be fond of “a bargain. ” There 
is temptation too in the thought that we are 
finding something hitherto unknown, which 
has never been hawked about, and which has 
not been subjected to handling by dealers. 
Then too the enthusiast often believes because 
he wishes to believe. The topic is not an 
enticing one; the study of it breeds distrust of 




facsimiles anb forgeries 41 


our own precious hoards. But the frauds are 
generally exposed in due season, and the honest 
dealers are on their guard against the produc¬ 
tions of the forgers. Students of autographic 
history are familiar with the manufactured 
letters of Schiller, of Byron, and of Shelley, 
and with the celebrated Edinburgh forgeries 
perpetrated by Alexander Howland Smith, 
who was tried, convicted, and sentenced to 
imprisonment in 1893. Smith dealt princi¬ 
pally in Walter Scott and Bums, but his work 
was so clumsily done that it is difficult to com¬ 
prehend how any sensible person could have 
been imposed upon. New Yorkers may remem¬ 
ber that the late John S. Kennedy paid a large 
sum for a lot of the false Bums manuscripts 
which he presented to the Lenox Library; 
but Mr. Kennedy was not a collector and he 
exercised no personal judgment about them; 
no doubt he trusted to some bookseller. But 
the most famous case is that of the Frenchman, 
Vrain-Lucas, who was tried in 1870 for swin¬ 
dling M. Chasles, the distinguished mathe¬ 
matician, who had been an autograph collector 
for thirty years. The folly of M. Chasles is 




42 IRambles in Hutoarapb OLanb 


almost inconceivable; he must have been 
under some hypnotic influence. He paid over 
140,000 francs for such absurd things as letters 
from Alcibiades to Pericles, from Alexander 
the Great to Aristotle, from Cleopatra to Cato, 
to Cassar, and to Pompey; from Herod to 
Lazarus, from Judas Iscariot to Mary Mag¬ 
dalene—all written in French and on paper 
bearing the Angouleme watermark. 

But Vrain-Lucas, who prospered well with 
his very ancient correspondence, found him¬ 
self in difficulties when the inventions he had 
showered upon the imaginative and credulous 
French mind came into contact with the cool 
and skeptical judgment of an Englishman. M. 
Chasles occupied himself in writing a book to 
prove that it was Pascal and not Sir Isaac 
Newton who discovered the principle of 
gravitation. Whether Vrain-Lucas suggested 
the idea or whether he merely fell in with it, 
I am not sure, but he met his Waterloo when 
he playfully dashed off letters purporting to 
have passed between Pascal and the Hon. 
Robert Boyle, and finally between Pascal and 
Sir Isaac. In one of the Pascal-Newton 



facsimiles anb forgeries 43 


letters the insouciant forger made Newton 
discuss abstruse geometrical questions at the 
age of eleven. Chasles was so elated over 
these letters that he showed them to the 
Academy. M. Prosper Faugere and Sir David 
Brewster—who had written the life of Newton 
and who was a Foreign Correspondent of the 
Academy—both declared that the documents 
were forgeries, and an investigation resulted 
in demolishing the whole structure. Vrain- 
Lucas was tried, convicted, and imprisoned. 
In the course of the inquiry, Sir David wrote to 
Sir Frederick Madden, the great authority on 
ancient manuscripts, this letter which is my 
only relic of the Vrain-Lucas affair: 


Allerly Melrose. 

Septr 17" 1867. 


Sir— 

You are no doubt acquainted with the exciting 
controversy respecting the forged correspondence 
between Pascal and Newton. 

M. Chasles of the Institute has sent me some speci¬ 
mens of the notes alleged to be written by Sir Isaac. 

As you must have some of his stuff in the British 
Museum, I enclose one of the Notes, in the hope that 
you will have the goodness to compare it with New¬ 
ton’s handwriting and signature and let me know if 
there is any resemblance between them. 




44 ‘Kambles in autograph lanb 


From my recollection of Newton’s Mss. at Hurst- 
bourn Park which I carefully examined, and from one 
of his signatures now before me, I am perfectly con¬ 
vinced that the Letters of Newton are forgeries. 

As I have to give back the enclosed note to M. 
Chasles, I will thank you to return it. 

I am, sir, 

Ever most truly yrs, 

D. Brewster 

Sir Frederick Madden 
R. N. A. 

{Copy of the Note inclosed ) 

Si on vouloit examiner la philosophic de M. L. il ne 
seroit pas difficile de faire voir qu’il detoume la signi¬ 
fication des mots de leur usage ordinaire; lois par 
exemple [sic] qu’il appelle miracles les choses qui 
arrive [sic] dans le cours ordinaire de la nature; qu’il 
donne le nom de qualites occultes aux choses dont les 
causes nous sont inconnus, et qu’il appele ame ce qui 
n’anime pas le corps de l’homme. Is. Newton 

M. Chasles thus gained something resem¬ 
bling immortality. His repute as a man of 
science has faded and vanished, but so long as 
there are collectors of autographs, his fame as 
the monumental gull of the nineteenth cen¬ 
tury will never be lost in oblivion. It may 
not be an enviable fame, but perhaps it is 
better to be remembered for enthusiasm and 
simplicity than not to be remembered at all. 




CHAPTER III 

THE AUTOGRAPH IN LITERATURE 

Autographs in Literature—Hawthorne’s Essay—Hobbies— 
Bliss and Parker—Autographs in Poetry—An Autographic 
Lay—John Banvard—Poems by Lowell—Rev. J. F.— 
G. F. W.—Antiquity of Collecting. 

. Autographs have been strangely neglected 
in literature. We may leave out of view the 
bitter complaints of James Russell Lowell and 
other eminent growlers, who make such parade 
of their hostility to collectors, and who seem 
to think that their personal glory is enhanced 
by abusing the venturesome seekers for auto¬ 
graphic favours; but while I cannot altogether 
blame them for their restlessness under the 
infliction, I think they “make believe a great 
deal. ” 

The very best thing in literature concerning 
autographs is the little essay of Hawthorne, 
gentle and quite Hawthomish, inspired by 
45 


46 IRambles in autograph Xant> 


“a volume of autograph letters chiefly of 
soldiers and statesmen of the Revolution.” 
The mind of Hawthorne was awake to every¬ 
thing which appealed to the imagination. 

Strange [he writes] that the mere identity of paper and 
ink should be so powerful. The same thoughts might 
look cold and ineffectual, in a printed book. Human 
nature craves a certain materialism and clings per¬ 
tinaciously to what is tangible, as if that were of more 
importance than the spirit accidentally involved in it. 
And, in truth, the original manuscript has always 
something which print itself must inevitably lose. 

He does not carry out his thought by saying 
that the material, the tangible thing which 
the human mind demands is like the bird or the 
flower, a glance at which sets in motion the 
wings of imagination; if he had, he would have 
said it charmingly and not clumsily as I have 
done. What he wrote in this brief essay could 
not fail to gladden the heart of the most en¬ 
thusiastic lover of autographs, and we can 
only be sorry that it is not longer. He says, 
in conclusion: 

There are said to be temperaments endowed with 
sympathies so exquisite, that, by merely handling an 
autograph, they can detect the writer’s character with 



ftbe Hutograpb in literature 47 


unerring accuracy, and read his inmost heart as easily 
as a less gifted eye would peruse the written page. 
Our faith in this power, be it a spiritual one, or only a 
refinement of the physical nature, is not unlimited, in 
spite of evidence. God has imparted to the human 
soul a marvellous strength in guarding its secrets, and 
he keeps at least the deepest and most inward record 
for his own perusal. But if there be such sympathies 
as we have alluded to, in how many instances would 
History be put to the blush by a volume of autograph 
letters, like this which we now close! 

We have also occasional magazine or news¬ 
paper articles, usually made up by incompetent 
writers, of tedious descriptions of somebody’s 
unimportant collections, and a few technical 
works about as readable as the list of automo¬ 
bile owners in the Evening Post. There is a 
small book by Mr. George R. Sims, a dreary 
thing, devoid of even the merit of sprightliness ; 
George Birkbeck Hill’s Talks About Auto¬ 
graphs; Dr. Lyman C. Draper’s treatise on the 
autographs of the Signers; Mr. Broadley’s 
Chats on Autographs , full of interest and in¬ 
struction; a little volume of my own, long 
since forgotten and containing nothing in¬ 
structive; Dr. Henry T. Scott’s Autograph 
Collecting , published in 1894, more than half 




48 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


of which is taken up with facsimiles and a 
list of prices now useless and obsolete; and 
Scott and Pavey’s Guide to the Collector of 
Historical Documents , etc., published in 1891. 
There is also a scarce work by John Gough 
Nichols, called Autographs of Remarkable Per¬ 
sonages Conspicuous in English History , which 
appeared in 1829, but I never saw a copy of it. 
None of these things may with propriety be 
called “literature,” except, perhaps, Doctor 
Hill’s pleasant papers. I make this assertion, 
feeling safe because Mr. Broadley, who is a 
large man, is some three thousand miles away 
enjoying his treasures at his retreat in the 
south of England—“ The Knapp, ” Bradpole— 
and he himself calls his book A Practical Guide 
for the Collector , as Doctor Scott calls his A 
Practical Manual for Amateurs and Historical 
Students . The fact is that autograph collec¬ 
tors generally want to speak and to write 
about their own particular possessions, and 
have more regard for their own accumulations 
than they have for the literary aspect of the 
subject. That is the case with me I know, 
and it is not unusual with the hobby people. 




ftbe Hutoorapb in Xiterature 49 


I read recently a story of the late Cornelius 
N. Bliss, McKinley’s Secretary of the Interior, 
and Judge Alton B. Parker. These two men, 
strongly antagonistic in politics, chanced to 
be seated next to each other at some dinner. 
While they differed in their political views, 
they were both proud of their collections of 
cattle. When Mr. Bliss returned home and 
was asked by Mrs. Bliss what he and the 
Judge talked about, he replied: “He talked 
about his herd and I talked about mine.” 
A club has been organised lately, called “The 
Hobby Club,” composed entirely of men who 
have “hobbies. ” I venture to predict that at 
their reunions each man will talk mostly of his 
own hobby; he may feign a polite interest in 
the fads of the others, but it will require an 
effort. As old Stapleton in Marryat’s story 
would say, “It’s human natur’.” 

Even the luckless beings who have no 
hobbies and who pretend to find amusement 
in contemplating the luckier ones who have 
them, admit that the hobby is a good thing to 
possess if well managed. In that strange 
medley The Doctor , Southey says: 


4 




50 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


He is indeed a fortunate man who, if he must have a 
hobby-horse, which is the same thing as saying if he 
will have one, keeps it not merely for pleasure but for 
use, breaks it in well, has it entirely under command, 
and gets as much work out of it as he could have done 
out of a common roadster. 

As autographs appear to have little or no 
place in prose, they are absolutely ignored in 
poetry. Books are more fortunate; there are 
volumes of considerable size made up wholly 
of book-verse. It must be confessed that the 
field is larger and more tempting, and the 
fondness for books is general while the love 
of autographs is limited to a select few. My 
friend, the son of a poet and the editor of the 
little monthly which, under the name of 
The Collector , has been for many years pub¬ 
lished in New York, harmoniously invokes the 
muse from time to time; but he usually re¬ 
stricts himself to such comparatively trifling 
themes as: 

Foreknowledge, will and fate, 

Fix’d fate, free-will, foreknowledge absolute. 


Artemus Ward thought that an occasional 
“goak” improved a comic paper, and in the 




Gbe Hutoorapb in literature 51 


belief that a '‘poem” about autographs might 
perhaps be appropriate to the pages of an 
'‘autograph periodical” I favoured him with 
an effusion substantially as follows: 

LYRA AUTOGRAPHICA 

Of books the poets often sing, 

But every critic laughs 
To see that strange and wondrous thing, 

A verse on autographs. 

Oh, why not autographic lays, 

I own I cannot see, 

“L. S.” and “A. L. S.” to praise, 

And sometimes “L. S. D. ”? 

The rhymester hastens to address 

Sweet screeds on “bliss” and “kisses,” 

Not to “D. S.” or “A. N. S.” 

But merely trifling Misses. 

A book is often dear, ’t is true, 

Bound in levant or calf, 

Yet surely some affection’s due 
Unto the autograph. 

So let some glorious Milton rise 
Of autographs to chant, 

For I confess, to my surprise 
I’ve tried to—but I can’t. 

I had well-nigh overlooked a choice morsel 
of poesy which a Boston friend bestowed 




52 TRambles in Hutograpb Xant> 


upon me in his malicious desire to bring my 
favourite pursuit into ridicule. The hand¬ 
writing is poor, but I have been able to decipher 
all but the signature. This is the jewel of 
metrical delight. 

’T would provoke a judge to laugh 
When folks ask one’s autograph. 

Worthless sure as weeds or chaff 
Is an empty autograph. 

Why should any but riff-raff 
Care about an autograph? 

Yet since harder it was by half 
To refuse our autograph, 

We Pierian springs who quaff 
Oft must give our autograph. 

April 23, 1849. 

The author was ashamed to sign his name in 
such a way that it could be read. 

He got up all the available rhymes to auto¬ 
graph—except one—and adapted his senti¬ 
ments to fit them. I can fancy how clever he 
deemed his verselets to be and how proudly he 
scrawled them on a fair page of his friend’s 
album; for the sheet on which they appear is 
manifestly taken from one of these fearsome 
books. 




£be Hutograpb in literature 53 


My Boston acquaintance has also kindly 
sent to me this production of John Banvard, 
the Panorama man, whose biography sets 
forth that he painted a picture three miles 
long for his panorama and wrote seventeen 
hundred poems. 

Thus speaks the wise, prophetic sage: 

We ’ve entered now the “electric age;” 

The time is near when autographs 

Can be despatched by telegraphs. 

If this is one of the seventeen hundred, I am 
glad that I have never encountered the other 
sixteen hundred and ninety-nine. This foun¬ 
tain of poesy burst forth in 1881, when the 
telegraph was not a startling novelty, and 
“despatching’’ things “by telegraph” was 
common enough—but not “by telegraphs.” 
Evidently he thought he needed a perfect 
rhyme for “autographs, ” but he did not really 
succeed in getting one. 

In reference to his prediction, I may say 
that some years ago I invested what was a 
considerable sum—for me—in an invention 
merely because it was called the “Telauto¬ 
graph,” which actually conveys the auto- 




54 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


graphic message itself. I have an idea of 
applying my dividends to the purchase of 
holograph letters of Thomas Lynch, Jr., 
Button Gwinnett, and William Shakespeare— 
when I get the dividends. 

In bewailing the paucity of autographic 
verse I have not forgotten James Russell 
Lowell, that professed hater of autographs; 
but, strictly speaking, his poem is not about 
autographs—it is an autograph itself; and he 
did it fairly well, probably making a wry face 
meanwhile; undoubtedly “it revolted him but 
he did it.” I find it in the ninth volume of 
the Riverside edition of his works. 

FOR AN AUTOGRAPH 

Though old the thought and oft exprest, 

’Tis his at last who says it best— 

I ’ll try my fortune with the rest 

Life is a leaf of paper white 
Whereon each one of us may write 
His word or two, and then comes night. 

“Lo, time and space enough,” we cry, 

“To write an epic!” so we try 
Our wits upon the edge, and die. 




£bc autograph in literature 55 


Muse not which way the pen we hold, 

Luck hates the slow and loves the bold, 

Soon comes the darkness and the cold. 

Greatly begin! though thou have time 
But for a line, be that sublime— 

Not failure, but low aim, is crime. 

Ah, with what lofty hope we came! 

But we forget it, dream of fame, 

And scrawl, as I do here, a name. 

In a magazine called The Autograph , for 
March, 1912, the following is given as a 
quotation from Lowell, but I do not discover 
it in my edition. 

AN AUTOGRAPH 

O’er the wet sands an insect crept 
Ages ere man on earth was known— 

And patient Time, while Nature slept, 

The slender tracing turned to stone. 

*T was the first autograph; and ours? 

Prithee, how much of prose or song, 

In league with the creative powers, 

Shall ’scape Oblivion’s broom so long? 

This conveys the idea that the first auto¬ 
graph was written by an insect. It does not 
bear the marks of Lowell s fastidious taste, 




56 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


and if he really wrote it I am not surprised 
that it is not included in the Riverside edition 
of his “Works.” 

Quite often odd and freaky bits find their 
way into the omnium gatherum of a collector. 
A friend gave me some months ago a letter 
from a brother collector in which the writer 
says: “Amongst my letters is one from a 
hangman, and amongst my detached auto¬ 
graphs is one of a man who was ‘hung, drawn, 
and quartered’ (I imagine that he was the 
last, in England).” Naturally this last- 
mentioned gem was placed among the de¬ 
tached autographs; and the communication 
from the hangman ought to strike a chord in 
the breast of every collector. In my own 
possession is a curious record of the solemn 
silliness of a bigoted anti-autograph ass. I do 

not know who the Reverend J. F-was, or 

anything about him except that he was at 
large as long ago as 1836, and I trust that he 
has no able-bodied descendants living. It is 
amusing to observe how seriously the despiser 
of autographs takes himself; what a deplor¬ 
able lack of humour he exhibits; how gravely 





Ebe autograph in literature 57 


he proclaims his own superabundant righteous¬ 
ness and wisdom; with what compassion 
he rebukes the ungodly person who betrays a 
hankering after specimens of handwriting. It 
appears, by a memorandum appended to the 

sermon, that “Mr. F- having been asked 

for a contribution to a Lady’s Album, complied, 
and wrote a few lines rather reluctantly; on 
the next day regretting that he had acceded 
to what he usually discountenanced, he wrote 
the preceding note which he requested might 
be pasted over his previous contribution.” 
Ah! the woman tempted him and he did wrong 
—that is, he did write. Like many another 
pious humbug, he thought to conceal his dire 
sin by “pasting” something over the record of 
his crime, and behold! he has only preserved 
that record even until the twentieth century. 
The “preceding note” deserves quotation not 
only for its intrinsic demerits but for the 
Johnsonian eloquence of its style. 

Will the proprietor of this volume accept it as a 
sincerely friendly sentiment that I do greatly wish the 
Ladies would be cured of this vain fantasy of Albums? 
It is a littleness of which it would be worthy of their 




58 iRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


good sense and good taste to rid themselves. The 
volumes, when filled, are more worthless than any 
others of the same quantity of contents; a collection of 
unmeaning scraps, written under the awkwardness of 
having nothing to suggest what to write (unless some¬ 
thing to insinuate a compliment to the “fair posses¬ 
sor”), and written reluctantly, except perhaps by 
those whose vanity may be flattered by finding their 
names so much accounted of. And as to having a num¬ 
ber of names put on the paper by the owners of them, 
it does appear to be a strange fancy to set any value 
on such an acquisition. With several ladies I have 
successfully remonstrated against the fashion and the 
folly, and have afterwards been thanked for hav¬ 
ing induced them to throw it away. I should be grat¬ 
ified, and even proud if I might hope to persuade 
the proprietor of this volume to the same worthy 
determination. 

j. f. 

March 14,1836. 

But let us be just to F-. I am not sure 

that he was wrong in denouncing albums; and 
he spells “Ladies” once at least with a capital 
L. On the whole, I think I will withdraw the 
offensive epithet I bestowed upon him. Per¬ 
haps it was the album and not the autograph 
which aroused his clerical wrath. At all 
events, he is entitled to the benefit of the doubt, 
as every criminal is who is arraigned at the 





Hbc Hutoorapb in literature 59 


bar of justice. But there is no excuse for his 
clumsy attempt to hide his transgression by 
paste. I judge by inspection of my original 
that the “Fair Proprietor,” unmoved by the 
oration, kept both of the writings and declined 
to paste. 

Another example of self-conceit is afforded 
by a printed paper given to me by Mr. Good- 
speed of Boston. It reads as follows : 

Little Holland House, Kensington W. 

Mr. G. F. W-regrets to say that it is against a 

principle he holds, with reference to the modern cus¬ 
tom of autograph collecting, to accede to the request 
just made of him. 

It does not require a Sherlock Holmes to 
detect that the request was for “his auto¬ 
graph.” W-must have “held” a fine as¬ 

sortment of “principles. ” While he is not to 
be scolded for declining to write his name at 
the solicitation of the impudent creature who 
disturbs the peaceful meditations of the great, 
it is sublime self-admiration which exalts his 
unwillingness to the dignity of a “principle.” 
He means to say that he dislikes to give his 
signature to an intrusive stranger; the request 





6o IRambles In autograph Xanb 


annoys him, puts him to trouble. Long¬ 
fellow and Oliver Wendell Holmes, whose 
good nature in the matter of autographs has 
become almost proverbial, were certainly not 
unprincipled; their principles were surely as 

good as those of Mr. G. F. W-; but they 

were not puffed up with personal pride. He 
might as well have said that he held principles 
against being jostled on the street, or buying 
a paper from a persistent newsboy, or having 
a hard-boiled egg for breakfast, or using 
French vermouth in his cocktail. With all his 
"principles,” he could not help writing letters 
now and then, and I have one of them in 
which he excuses himself for not keeping a 
promise to lend some pictures, on the ground 
that when he promised, he forgot that he did 
not have the pictures. Manifestly he had no 
principle against making a promise which he 
could not perform. 

It will be observed that the lordly W- 

refers to "the modern custom of autograph 
collecting.” But is it an extremely modem 
custom? Mr. Broadley reminds us that Pliny 
and Cicero were collectors; and we are told by 





Gbe autograph in literature 61 


others that, in the palmy days of Greece and 
Rome, large sums were paid for autographs and 
that there were thieves and forgers of them. 
Yet those sapient gentlemen W. Robertson 
Nicoll and Thomas Seccombe, in their History 
of English Literature , assert that Boswell “ initi¬ 
ated autograph hunting, ” because he wrote to 
Lord Chatham to “honour him with a letter 
now and then,” thus characteristically miss¬ 
ing the point of Boswell’s application. The 
Chinese are said to prize autographs “above 
all' treasures” and to regard them “with idola¬ 
trous veneration;” but whether this is true since 
our Oriental friends have begun to indulge in 
the modem luxuries of rebellion and a repub¬ 
lic I cannot say. The Paston Letters include 
five large volumes of autograph letters of the 
reigns of Henry VI. and Henry VII.; and 
whether or not people collected then after our 
own fashion, we know that the custom 
flourished in its most virulent form in the 
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, when 
“men and women of light and learning were 
accustomed to carry about oblong volumes of 
vellum, on which their friends and acquaint- 




62 IRambles tn autograph ILanb 


ances were requested to write some motto or 
phrase under his or her signature.” John 
Milton wrote in one of these Alba Amicorum 
in 1651, and indeed at Geneva in 1639 in the 
album of Camillus Cardoyn, a Neapolitan 
nobleman then living in that city, but he had 

never heard of W-nor of the Reverend J. 

F-, and his conscience had not been pro¬ 

perly awakened to the enormity of the offence. 
It would have been an edifying spectacle, the 

pursuit of Mr. W-by the autograph king, 

Mr. B-, with an album, while W-, like 

a modem Joseph, was fleeing from the presence 
of the tempter. 

But why should we pour the vials of our 
mighty wrath upon the heads of the wretched 
W-and the futile F-? It is unbecom¬ 

ing and unwise to abuse anybody; that meth¬ 
od of speech should be left to ‘‘progressive” 
orators and the advocates of woman suffrage. 

If W-and F-could know how severe we 

are with them, they might, as Grosvenor im¬ 
plored Bunthome in Patience , entreat us by the 
memory of our aunt, not to curse them. Yet 
as they will never know anything about our 








ftbe Hutograpb in literature 63 


censure, and would probably not care much if 
they did, no serious harm will result. Doubt¬ 
less they were worthy persons, despite their 
heretical views on the subject of autographs. 



CHAPTER IV 

AUTOGRAPHS AND EXTRA-ILLUSTRATION 

Poe’s Article—Lithographs—Poe, Nelson, and Wellington— 
Mr. Marvin’s Chapter—Mr. Broadley on Extra-Illustration 
—Autographs in Extra-Illustration—Some Minor Errors in 
Mr. Broadley’s Book—Comparisons of Collections. 

In referring to the literature of autographs I 
omitted to mention a ‘ ‘Chapter on Autography ” 
by Edgar Allan Poe, which consists principally 
of remarks about persons whom he called 
“living literati of the country,” supplemented 
by some childish comments on their chiro- 
graphy. He includes some people of impor¬ 
tance, like Emerson, Irving, and Bryant, and a 
good many of no importance whatever, such 
as J. Beauchamp Jones, Mrs. M. St. Leon 
Loud, and one Mcjilton whose name does not 
fill the trump of fame. The lady is described 
as “one of the finest poets of this country,” 
which reminds one forcibly of Mr. Jefferson 
Brick’s estimate of Major Pawkins and pre- 
64 



Edgar Allan Poe 

From an etching 








Hutograpbs ant) j£itra*HIlustration 65 


pares us for the assertion, later on, that “Mr. 
J. R. Lowell, of Massachusetts, is entitled, 
in our opinion, to at least the second or third 
place among the poets of America.” In view 
of these expressions, it may be well to add that 
the article was not intended to be humorous. 
It is written in the worst magazine style of 
the period and bears evidence of having been 
a “pot-boiler.” Poor Poe was compelled to 
waste much time and energy on many such 
wretched things for the sake of the pittance 
they brought to him. He was apt to be dull 
and sometimes offensive when he indulged in 
what he was pleased to call criticism of his 
contemporaries; most of it now seems very 
thin, arrogant, and impertinent. This I say 
although he does utter the profound truth that 
“the feeling which prompts to the collection 
of autographs is a natural and rational one.” 
The commonplace yet pretentious essay, if 
essay it may be styled, would never, of course, 
have survived the magazine which gave it 
birth had not the after-acquired fame of the 
author given some interest to even his poorest 
scribblings. 


5 




66 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


A comparison of Poe’s method of dealing 
with autographs and that of Hawthorne will 
show clearly the great difference between the 
two minds. There was always a bit of the 
charlatan about Poe, despite his flashes of 
brilliancy. Hawthorne’s autographic com¬ 
ments reveal the calm, sincere, comprehensive 
sanity of a great personage, while Poe’s might 
have been penned by some shallow schoolboy. 

Autograph hunters well know the value of a 
scrap of Poe’s neat and beautiful handwriting. 
I had what I thought was a splendid letter of 
his, although I was a little suspicious about 
its authenticity; and one day, resolved to 
learn the truth however disagreeable it might 
be, I called upon the late Charles De Forest 
Bums to pass judgment. That candid and 
skilful expert reluctantly revealed to me that 
it was only an excellent lithograph, and I was 
no longer repentant over the fact that I had 
caused it to be bound up in an “ extra-illus¬ 
trated” volume. 

Experience has taught me that good litho¬ 
graphs are much more deceptive than photo¬ 
graphs. It is well to be cautious, for example, 




iu 'X.xsiux. C*+U:L nui.ic. & l£r< rA* CL •. ’< 


IatU') 


—-t— 

J 

A r .xi 1 1 v £-) c*~&Hi £~ % <'/*~5oo\~ £*-*' *-5 • ■ ' ‘ : ' y ‘- x - 

; /* -mL^s s£c* a Cr*^~nrv± j£> c (fct c< * O - 


I . ' 'Lr*~' £■£-»? cT c^f-uo^e O 

“' w O 

' AC"it >£y i r . *. t^CH^u ._' c 

■* ” - . • c y e^ / ^ ^ 

<CA. rt.>f'K*vM.r<Z £<rV’~t+-ftC' Let, 'tfeeS £~~ Le^~<-eC.c\j^ 
/— - - "ii^c -1 c .*-V’^ ^n- 


;u/A<-au^ 

) *7 . —\ 

•C 44 - fC - - ^< .» t tvJ ? 




i 




’ t^-^L Cv~^t,L\ , 


>vv<. ►— - — - ^ - ~^ ~~ w y /^t*. C\yH~ -- —— 

S:<-C\jl cl C.c clLc, <?* ^rcce/l^ujO ^ J^JL AvU>l~j X /^c2T yT'kai- . 

^ ^ tf hc^iA r-utu /rli arro a <■/« - -j- . 


•7T ^ , ‘“P cw , , y' / <7 ^ /If 

nv-i- L t .v^- c t v -i^kcu a Cs£, cl^tO-* e v »—/A_«^ i- 


. i/ 

. ‘^t.C' ~r^,j\JL) , ^twe Si^i-y^et, C^u^Myve t /£jU <cc«»£ V<^ 

Hr*'- ;.4':ai<M £-5 4c>^*-tJ*<) ' e*L~ef*-*3?< **4+u.\L 


UrU?<> :u Z xzz ^Hisw. - ^ ^ 0-7 v. j>c _ v< *>>v<nt«jC^ U ’ % 

; s-*‘'-^_- lvn^X - ; L " / ( - •-^ i-^r-z) r<lc 


.v £T<£c 

c 


7^/t<a\ ' 7 /cc 


VtCf l fv 


y • ^^ 

' i : u/un<4^1 •Z jS^i t^ci 7^'C 


^<A.M^ad(, /*-<?■ H ^>~0 CSX » H<jx- c-orytr ^<Hb st^HxruJl, 


<V 

«E CJ*^ 


• £>X-Juu^U: w.-iv. 1 , ^c^ZclLI 'H-<r firo <c<r^. __ ____ ^ ___ 

apo . *- v jUy^yi icc<£:. fl 

I Cirtn<£<) jlc r<. -x-l:c u 7<^. CH 0 ~O A^ L • L *\H'""'}£ 

^~H(4 (*~~—., ;,- ^,- -i-i-i / rH~u>L \ I "" N s ^ 

• 2£. ^ 

?2yL jg ^ sCc^mJ^ 

^i^c, Jt'tc ix. -* y J e-i^U-iTi^z c L 


/2ce£ 9L<rt 4 Jcrt> 4” 


cS 


j CUHWJZ* ^ ??l£s-/lc T'pVIS'iL€ a£/ 




^ fy 2 ^*j J UH/lA <-x .<^6 / lC£ ■'rtcH^ 

“*• f t »s€*,ct'- iX, h^< L 




*>■**{*’ stiZ. C^Z/jL^> — 



|^K>co-^ Jtecoi S<,C U-^-i 

I SmS'i'L, tfj/ l/t^ PiXfayvetrt- O' ,^KjZ- LjU-iAJL, Cw y^C ^ ^ j 

/^ A % i . ^ . 




Hx. c-tf. ^ ^ 


I y~ cZ, Uc/Uii y Ko, A. ^ ct^H&.cp/k ^^2) 


Page of original draft of a letter (7 pages) by Edgar Allan Poe, undated, but written about 1844 

























Hutoorapbs anb Eitra^lIIuetration 67 


about so-called Wellington letters, especially 
formal ones; for it is known that the Duke, 
whose correspondence of that sort was enor¬ 
mous, was compelled to resort to the use of 
lithographed forms to help him, and the 
imitations are excellent. There is another 
danger about his letters, to be encountered in 
most cases of public men who have secretaries, 
illustrated in a story related by Lionel Tolle- 
mache in his Old and Odd Memories . An 
Eton boy, who had shot some yellow-hammers, 
was told by mischievous schoolmates that 
these birds were under the Duke’s special 
guardianship, and was hoaxed into writing a 
letter of humble apology for his assault upon 
the protected yellow-hammers. He received 
a curt answer, saying that F. M. the Duke of 
Wellington could not make out what he meant. 
One of the masters, anxious to obtain an au¬ 
tograph, bought this reply for five shillings 
and afterwards discovered that the letter was 
almost certainly written by a secretary who 
could counterfeit exactly the Duke’s hand¬ 
writing. 

Doctor Scott tells of a supposed letter of 



68 IRambles in autograph Xant> 


Lord Nelson, belonging to a poor labouring 
man, which appeared from a tracing to have 
been written by Nelson with his left hand, but 
when examined by an expert on behalf of a 
would-be purchaser, turned out to be a mere 
lithograph, on cartridge paper, perfectly clean, 
and “had never been sealed or properly 
folded into the shape for posting”; the date of 
the letter being before the time of envelopes, 
which did not come into general use until 
about 1839. Well disposed friends, com¬ 
pletely innocent of wrongful intent, have often 
submitted to me lithographed letters, but 
except in the Poe case I have usually been 
able to detect the truth about them on a mere 
inspection; and in that instance the letter 
came from a dealer who was himself deceived; 
undoubtedly he had passed it without due 
examination, although the price was so small 
that it ought to have awakened distrust in 
the minds of both of us. 

Mr. Frederic Rowland Marvin devotes a 
chapter of his Excursions of a Book Lover to 
‘ ‘Holographs. ’' He has disarmed me by kindly 
giving me a copy of the book, or I might be 



autographs atib ExtrasIlustration 69 


tempted to break a friendly lance with him 
on some of his propositions; not however on 
his assertion that “the letters and journals of 
men who have filled positions of public trust 
are often of the utmost value/’ But when he 
says that “Van Buren was regarded in his day 
as a very trickish and unreliable politician,” 
I am led to express an emphatic dissent. The 
man who was United States Senator, Governor 
of New York, Secretary of State, Vice-Presi¬ 
dent, and President was not so regarded, ex¬ 
cept perhaps by some of his political enemies. 
That estimate of him is a growth of later days, 
fostered by the Whig partisans who used to 
write our history for us. The contrary has 
been established by the late Edward Morse 
Shepard in his masterly little biography of 
Van Buren, and later historians are grad¬ 
ually discarding the old slanders. It is a 
mistake to accept as the general judg¬ 
ment of the community contemporary assaults 
upon a statesman made by prejudiced parti¬ 
sans. 

Mr. Broadley in his Chats on Autographs 


says: 



70 'Rambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


The classification of autographs has given rise to 
endless discussion. On this subject I am at issue with 
Mr. Joline. Personally I regard extra-illustration as 
the most effective and interesting plan of arranging 
and preserving autographs. Mr. Joline, on the other 
hand, “meditates” upon extra-illustration as only 
an incident or contingent possibility in autograph 
collection.” 

I am not quite able to perceive exactly 
what this has to do with the classification of 
autographs; I think he means the arrangement 
of them after they have been collected. Nor 
do I fully understand how the mere arrange¬ 
ment of them can be anything but an ‘ ‘ inci¬ 
dent ” to the main thing, which is the obtaining 
and possession of them. If one accumulates 
a number of precious stones, whether he puts 
them in a safe deposit vault or in his overcoat 
pocket is certainly only an “incident,” for 
they were surely not acquired for the purpose 
of adorning the vault or of adding to the at¬ 
tractiveness of the pocket. Whether your 
soldiers are attired in scarlet jackets or in 
unobtrusive khaki is but an incident in the 
assembling of an army. But with respect to 
extra-illustration, I do not know that there is 




Hutograpbs anh Eitra^Mlustration 71 


any issue between Mr. Broadley and myself. 
Some years ago I casually suggested, inno¬ 
cently enough and without the least notion of 
dogmatising about the subject, that I was 
“unable to decide” whether it is a good 
plan to employ valuable autographs in extra¬ 
illustration ; and I expressed the view that it 
“really belittles a fine, full, and interesting 
letter” to insist on its permanent association 
with anything else. Ten years have passed 
since I uttered this somewhat harmless 
dictum; I am older now and, I hope, wiser. 
I have reached the sage conclusion that the 
best way to arrange one’s autographs is to do 
it to please one’s self. Advancing years make 
us more tolerant. In the matter of rings, for 
example, I may prefer to wear them on my 
fingers, but a South African king may be 
fonder of wearing them in his nose, and his 
method may suit him far better than mine 
would. 

I cannot tell how others may be affected but 
I find that a good letter, taken by itself, and 
bearing substantially the appearance which it 
had when it left the hands of the writer, im- 




72 IRambles in autograph OLanb 


presses my imagination more deeply than it 
does when I come upon it bound in a book 
that may or may not be worthy to contain it ; 
and imagination plays a great part in the 
pleasure of autograph ownership. This may 
be only a personal idiosyncrasy; tastes vary so 
and I am not sufficiently self-centred to regard 
my own as a standard. Some men love red 
neckties and chequered waistcoats; this seems 
strange to me, but I am far from wishing to 
get up an “issue” about it; and would no 
more do so than I would attempt to make one 
with a man who likes cold, boiled veal, which 
I detest—that trait being the only character¬ 
istic which I have in common with Macaulay. 

We must remember that our autographs are 
not for ourselves only; ultimately they will 
pass into the possession of our successors. If 
one of these successors especially covets, for 
example, a fine letter of Keats, he does not like 
to be compelled to buy a big book or set of 
books, full of things which he does not want, 
in order to obtain the one thing which he does 
want. I am by no means opposed to the 
practice of extra-illustrating books; I have 




Hutograpbs anb Eitra^lUlustration 73 


frequently been guilty of it and have enjoyed 
it and the results of it; but this I will maintain, 
without fear of the punishment threatened by 
Mr. Broadley, that the real autograph lover, 
the genuine one, the simon pure article, the 
one who owns no other goddess than the deity 
Autographina, preserves his treasures in port¬ 
folios, unmolested by paste, ribbons, or printed 
text—not even inlaid. A true book-collector 
will not, except in a case of extreme necessity, 
destroy an ancient, faded, and decayed cover¬ 
ing in order to enshrine the object of his affec¬ 
tion in the richest and daintiest of bindings. 
When one has a complete set of the “Signers 
of the Declaration of Independence,” or of 
“ Napoleon and his Marshals,” it may not be 
amiss to bind up the one with Sanderson’s 
Lives , as Doctor Emmet does, or the other 
with Sloane’s Napoleon —or perhaps with 
some less voluminous work; but few extra¬ 
illustrators are content with such simple pro¬ 
cedure. They are for ever overloading their 
pets not only with autographs and with por¬ 
traits of persons incidentally referred to in the 
text, but with “views” of places mentioned 



74 Gambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


by the author. Years ago the late John H. 
V. Arnold, a confirmed extra-illustrator, wrote 
to me: 

If you can succeed in making up your mind at some 
future time that you have gathered enough materials 
to satisfy you and bind up your bantling, you will be 
possessed of courage enough to do almost anything. 
To one who really becomes interested in the “busi¬ 
ness” it is the most fascinating of occupations to “ex¬ 
tend” a good book, but it is hard to say “hold— 
enough!” 

Mr. Broadley himself unconsciously fur¬ 
nishes an example of what many regard as an 
objectionable feature of the use of valuable 
letters in extra-illustration. He tells us that he 
has “extended to seventeen volumes” the two 
volumes of the Recollections of Edmund Yates. 
Letters of Yates himself would naturally find 
a place in such a collection, and he may well 
have availed himself of several minor ones hav¬ 
ing no especial rarity or distinction. But let us 
suppose that he had “inserted” some impor¬ 
tant letters of Thackeray or of Dickens, as he 
may have done, for both of those men played 
a leading part in one of the most important 
occurrences in the life of Yates—not a mere 



Hutoorapbs anfc Citra^Wiustration 75 

autographic specimen but one of high intrinsic 
interest; fancy it obscured in the rubbish of 
seventeen volumes! It would be like a dia¬ 
mond in a muck-heap, although I do not mean 
to apply that offensive term to the interesting 
gatherings included in Mr. Broadley’s vol¬ 
umes, no doubt a delightful assemblage. But 
to me the beauty and the individuality of the 
rare letter would be greatly dimmed by its 
surroundings. Mr. Broadley, who is a lawyer 
of high reputation, undoubtedly recognises 
the force of the phrase “Noscitur a sociis.” 
The enthusiastic extra-illustrator is apt to 
lose his sense of proportion and to mingle 
trifles and rarities without careful discrimina¬ 
tion. He often thrusts his nobility in the 
companionship of the hoi polloi unless he has 
more self-restraint than I can command. By 
the way, is it strictly accurate to call the 
insertion of autograph-letters in books “Gran¬ 
gerising”? As I remember it—the sage of 
Bradpole will correct me if I am wrong—• 
James Granger, the Shiplake parson, founder 
of the cult, limited his industry to portraits, 
and one of the chief objections urged against 




76 IRambles in autograph Xanfc 


his methods, wholly inapplicable to auto¬ 
graphs, was that it was often necessary to muti¬ 
late or to destroy valuable books in order to 
procure the desired portraits and plates. In 
these days, when it is comparatively easy to 
find portraits not connected with bound vol¬ 
umes, there is not much force in that ob¬ 
jection. 

There is one point, however—an insignifi¬ 
cant one—on which I must take issue with 
Mr. Broadley, and that is in regard to the 
spelling of the last name of James Anthony 
Froude, whom he calls “Frowde,” twice in 
the text and once in the index. There were 
Frowdes in England in the eighteenth cen¬ 
tury, and there are some there yet, Mr. Henry 
Frowde among the number; but neither the 
historian nor his father spelled the name in 
that way. Broadley quotes one of my Froude 
letters in full—it is plainly signed “ Froude” 
—as well as several others from my collection, 
without giving me any credit for their posses¬ 
sion; but he did not mean to do me any 
injustice, for he is one of the fairest-minded 
and most kindly of men. But he is not 




Hutograpbs anb lEitra^HUuatration 77 


scrupulously careful about little things: we 
find our friend W. H. Bixby, of St. Louis, 
masquerading under the name of “Bexby,” 
and he makes me use the impossible word 
“colligendering;” however, that is probably a 
printer’s error. Naturally he is not familiar 
with American collectors or he would not asso¬ 
ciate my humble name with the illustrious 
names of Emmet and Morgan, which is 
flattering but undeserved; it is very much 
like speaking of Hannibal, Napoleon, and Tom 
Thumb as distinguished generals. My insig¬ 
nificant collection may no more be compared 
with Emmet’s and Morgan’s than a cross¬ 
roads Methodist chapel may be compared with 
St. Peter’s at Rome; but one can always for¬ 
give errors of that nature. Still the unmerited 
prominence which Mr. Broadley gives to me 
in his book reminds me somewhat of my set 
of the publication called The World's Best 
Literature , in which Mr. Denton J. Snider 
(of Ohio) occupies twenty-six pages, and 
Socrates, sixteen. 




CHAPTER V 


THE AUTOGRAPH MARKET 

A Stately Beggar—Percy Fitzgerald—Charles Robinson’s 
Article—Dr. Brownson’s Joke—Edward Eggleston—Glad¬ 
stone— Henry James Byron—Lawrence Mendenhall’s 
Paper—Its Follies—Dr. William B. Sprague—Buying 
Autographs—Laurence Hutton’s Views — ‘‘ Doraku ” — A 
Dinner Jest—General Ignorance about Autographs—A 
Reporter—Gwinnett. 


The beggar of autographs and his practices 
have been the subject of much comment not 
always good-natured, and it must be confessed 
that he is often irritating, causing grievous 
mortification to real collectors, while some¬ 
times he is merely ridiculous. Mr. C. E. 
Goodspeed, of Boston, has supplied me with 
many curiosities connected with the autograph 
mania, and he lately presented to me a speci¬ 
men of the impressive in mendicancy, covering 
two folio pages and bearing date October 11, 
1844. If the pear-headed king of the French 
did not hasten to yield to the eloquence of 
78 


Zbc Butograpb Market 79 


this request, which seems to have emanated 
from a source no less dignified than an English 
Custom-House, he richly deserved to lose the 
crown which was in fact plucked from his brow 
about four years later. The epistle reads as 
follows: 

To his Most Gracious Majesty Louis Philippe, King 
of the French; 

May it please Your Majesty: 

Having succeeded in accumulating an extensive 
collection of autographs of the most illustrious and 
eminent personages throughout Europe, I regret that 
all my efforts to enrich my list with that of Your 
Majesty, have been hitherto unavailing. 

In expressing the hope that Your Majesty may 
graciously be pleased to condescend to supply the 
vacant niche in my collection, I throw myself entirely 
upon the urbanity that distinguishes Your Majesty’s 
character, and seek pardon for this act of presumption. 

Permit me, Royal Sir, to offer my heartfelt congrat¬ 
ulations on Your Majesty’s visit to our shores, and 
with dutiful obedience and the most deferential sub¬ 
mission, 

I am, 

Your Majesty’s most humble and very faithful 
servant, E-B-. 

This address to monarchy is more elaborate 
and diffuse, yet less truthful and sincere than 
the one which is said to have been made to 



8o IRambles in autograph Xanb 


King Christian by a product of the bounding 
West who happened to be American Minister 
to Denmark. The courteous sovereign had 
just “treated” him to a “drink,” and when 
the ceremony was over, the envoy of the great 
Republic remarked: “King, that whiskey of 
yours is no good. I 'll send you some that 
will make your hair curl.” I understand that 
he kept his word so far as sending the whiskey 
was concerned; but whether it affected the 
King’s hirsute adornments in the manner 
promised, history fails to record 

Percy Fitzgerald, who is responsible for 
more sloppy books than almost any modern 
writer, has, of course, a few words to say about 
the autograph beggar, characterised by his 
customary ineptitude. In his Memories of 
an Author he refers to the letters of apprecia¬ 
tion written to authors, boasting that he has 
received such letters “from America, Austra¬ 
lia, Denmark, Norway, Iceland.” I should 
think that he might have had a large number 
from Iceland. He adds: 

The author must be on his guard, however, against 
the collectors, of whom there are a great number, and 




Gbe autograph flDnrfcet 81 


who season their application with a feigned admiration. 
The ordinary writer must not lay the flattering unc¬ 
tion to his soul that his handwriting is desired on 
account of his celebrity. It is wanted for strictly 
commercial purposes, for completing sets of auto¬ 
graphs, for “ Grangerising ” books and the like, or for 
illustrating topographical histories, where a specimen 
of the native’s handwriting comes in handily. Fors¬ 
ter’s Life of Dickens is a favourite work for “ Granger¬ 
ising.” The present writer figures in it passim; his 
writing, therefore, is desirable and a necessity. I 
am too modest to put it on any higher ground 
than this. 

His “modesty" will never hurt him much. 
I do not know what “topographical history" 
his autograph would adorn, unless it be the 
History of Noodleland. Is the “completion 
of a set of autographs" necessarily “a commer¬ 
cial purpose"? Would Mr. Broadley admit 
that asking an autograph for “Granger¬ 
ising a book" (as if one could Grangerise 
anything else) was “a commercial purpose"? 
The conclusion that to request an autograph 
for a set or for extra-illustration implies that 
the person addressed has no “celebrity" is an 
excellent example of Mr. Fitzgerald’s powers 
of reasoning. One suspects that the whole 




82 IRambles in Butograpb Xanb 


paragraph owes its existence to a wish to dis¬ 
play the writer’s alleged intimacy with Dick¬ 
ens; I discover only three references to 
Fitzgerald in the Life by Forster, although 
passim means “everywhere, all through.” 

Some years ago the Cosmopolitan Magazine 
published an article by a Mr. Charles Robin¬ 
son—described as a journalist, who was 
‘‘privately educated for the bar.” It was a 
shocking revelation of the methods of the 
pseudo-collector, calculated to make even one 
of the Public Library lions turn red for shame; 
and the writer appeared to be utterly uncon¬ 
scious of his own turpitude—rather proud of 
it in fact. Heaven knows what he would 
have been guilty of doing if he had been 
publicly and not privately educated for the 
bar. Practices like those which he confesses 
are what make the name of “autograph 
collector” odious to people who do not under¬ 
stand that there are many different varieties 
of the genus. How a decent man can consider 
it gentlemanly or proper to assert what is 
untrue and to deceive others merely to obtain 
their autographs, is beyond my comprehen- 



Sbe Hutograpb fIDarbet 


83 


sion. This individual tells us that Horace 
Greeley called the autograph hunters “those 
mosquitoes of literature .’ 9 After reading Mr. 
Robinson’s painful exposure of his own moral 
obliquity, I do not wonder that they were so 
described by one who might be characterised 
as “the bumblebee of politics.” 

Greeley himself has furnished numerous an¬ 
ecdotes of an autographic nature to the press 
humourists, such as the one about his letter 
discharging an incompetent printer which 
that person used for years as a letter of recom¬ 
mendation. There is also another, which has 
been told of many magnates, about his writing 
to an applicant, “I never send my autograph 
to any one. Yours truly, Horace Greeley.” 
I happen to have a letter written by the loco- 
foco Universalist who became a prominent 
Catholic, Orestes Augustus Brownson, which 
reads thus: 


Elizabeth, New Jersey, Jan. 17,1864. 
My dear Lady: I make it a rule never to answer 
a letter requesting my autograph. 

Very truly your obedient servant, 

0. A. Brownson. 




84 IRambles in Sutograpb Xanb 


Perhaps the reverend gentleman was joking 
with the “ Dear Lady,” but if so, I think it 
must have been the solitary joke of his long 
life. 

This odd way of protesting that you cannot 
or will not do a certain thing when you are in 
the very act of doing it is illustrated by another 
letter which is also in my possession. Edward 
Eggleston wrote to Mr. Dorlon, who was an 
arrant autograph beggar forty years ago and 
whose scraps still turn up occasionally among 
the “cheap lots”: 


Brooklyn, May 20th, 1873. 

Wm. L. Dorlon Esq. 

My dear Sir : 

Writing an autograph letter is a thing I never 
could do, especially when I have nothing to write 
about. I should like to oblige you by sending you 
something but you must excuse me. 

Very Respectfully yours, 

Edwd Eggleston 


This was before the days of the typewriter, 
and like the man who had been talking prose 
all his life without knowing it, Mr. Eggleston 
seems to have been unaware that every letter 




Gbe Hutograpb fIDarfcet 


85 


he had ever written with his own hand was 
“an autograph letter.” 

I had indulged in the hope that I had come 
upon an example more illustrious in its origin ; 
but while the handwriting is not wholly unlike 
that of Mr. Gladstone, I have reluctantly 
reached the conclusion that it is the produc¬ 
tion of some imitative private secretary. 


10 Downing Street. 

Whitehall. 

Mr. Gladstone much regrets that the applications 
which he receives for his autograph, from persons with 
whom he has not the honour of being acquainted, are 
so numerous that he is obliged to make it a rule not 
to accede to them. 

While I am on the subject of responses to 
autograph beggars, I may well refer to those 
which are meant to be “funny” and which 
usually take the form of allusion to cheques 
or written pecuniary obligations. If the 
writers knew how little originality they display 
they might perhaps refrain from such face¬ 
tiousness. An example of this sort of thing 
is afforded by Henry James Byron, the drama¬ 
tist, who writes: 




86 IRamblee in Hutograpb Xanb 


Haymarket Theatre. 

Oct. 31—1875. 


My dear sir: 

You appear to consider my autograph a desirable 
thing; the only way to prove its utter and complete 
worthlessness is to place I. O. U. over the signature of 
Yours faithfully, 

H. J. Byron 


The Bancrofts in their naive Recollections of 
Sixty Years Ago (published in 1909) speak of 
Henry J. Byron as “the celebrated author of 
the brilliant series of Strand burlesques.’’ 
The examples they give of his wit—which 
correspond with that of the highly comic letter 
just quoted—arouse no regret that the “bril¬ 
liant burlesques” have faded into oblivion. 
Now and then we lament over the inane and 
silly “musical comedies” of the present day, 
but they are no worse than Byron’s—which 
were made up chiefly of English puns, and 
those of the latter part of the last century were 
of the most distressing and soul-harrowing 
character. 

Another illustration of the way in which the 
laudable occupation of collecting autographs is 
misrepresented by people who masquerade as 




£be autograph flDarfcet 


87 


collectors, may be found in a short article pub¬ 
lished in some magazine whose name escapes 
me, by Mr. Lawrence Mendenhall, under the 
title of 11 Among My Autographs. ” It is rather 
colourless in the main, profusely adorned 
with facsimiles, but it lacks the exceedingly 
offensive features of Mr. Charles Robinson’s 
effusion. Among other things, Mr. Menden¬ 
hall proclaims, in that large, generalising way, 
as if he had been “retained to defend,” that 
“autograph collectors are by nature the most 
plausible, innocent, and truthful beings in the 
world; it is only the stubbornness of our victims 
which causes us unfortunate beings to resort 
to subterfuge.” There it is again! Uncon¬ 
sciously he shows the cloven foot; or, to mix 
the metaphors, he suffers the lion’s skin to slip 
from his head and shoulders. Real collectors 
do not want his sorry excuses; they do not 
resort to subterfuge at all; they have no “vic¬ 
tims”; they scorn to pester people of dis¬ 
tinction with mendicant letters. A decent 
self-respect would restrain them from such per¬ 
formances if they had any disposition to resort 
to them. The author of the brief dissertation 



88 IRambles in autograph Xant> 


volunteers some other suggestions which afford 
good evidence that he was only learning his 
alphabet as a collector. In regard to preserv¬ 
ing autographs he solemnly remarks: “The 
important point, in my opinion, is to keep all 
specimens fiat, letters especially to be un¬ 
folded, and to remain so, in order to avoid 
handling.” This advice is good enough, if 
quite elementary; but he might as well tell us 
not to use them as book-marks or not to give 
them to the baby to play with. He goes on 
to instruct us how “signatures” should be 
neatly pasted (comers only) with flour-paste, 
upon cards of uniform size. Except with 
regard to those of men whose letters or docu¬ 
ments are practically unattainable, the best 
way to arrange signatures is to pile them up 
neatly in the middle of the back-yard and set 
fire to them; or, if that seems objectionable, 
to bestow them upon some bright little boy 
as ornaments for his little album. Pace Mr. 
Broadley, they may be good enough to use for 
extra-illustration purposes. Why should any 
rational being, “erect upon two legs and bear¬ 
ing the outward semblance of a man,” write to 



£be autograph flfcarfcet 


89 


another man for his signature when he can buy 
almost any one he wants from Mr. Benjamin 
by an expenditure of a trifle more than the 
cost of paper, envelope, and postage, and that 
too without bringing discredit upon what, 
when practised properly, is a dignified pursuit? 

Yet I must do Mr. Mendenhall the justice 
to concede that he has some warrant in assum¬ 
ing that in the past respectable collectors 
“wrote for autographs,”—even the illustrious 
divine, Doctor William B. Sprague of Albany, 
the revered and honoured pioneer of American 
autograph collectors. I was slightly shocked 
when I found the evidence of it in an interest¬ 
ing letter of Mr. John Pierce published in an 
Albany newspaper in 1909. Mr. Pierce quotes 
a passage from Abdy’s Journal of a Residence 
and Tour in the United States in the Year 18j4 , 
describing a visit to Dr. Sprague. 


He had [wrote Abdy] a singular taste for collecting 
autograph signatures of persons remarkable in their 
generation for something or other. He showed me a 
considerable number—many of them of very equivo¬ 
cal celebrity. There were some of an early date; 
and others more “modern instances.” He had the 




90 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


signs manual of Lord Teignmouth—Lord Bexley—and 
Sir Francis Burdett;—all obtained from these dis¬ 
tinguished personages in reply to letters he had written 
to request the honour of having specimens of their 
handwriting. He had sent four—the fourth received 
no answer. He asked me to guess who it was; after 
telling the names I was right—it was Lord Brougham. 
He had made application of a similar kind to upwards 
of fifty public characters in his own country, and had, 
with one or two exceptions, attributable to accident, 
met with obliging and courteous replies. 


That guess about Brougham was not a remark¬ 
able one. 

But that was in a time when, as Mr. Pierce 
remarks, “it was easy to receive as a gift that 
which we are now unable to buy/’ and he 
might have added, “when it was difficult to 
buy what we can now obtain for a trifling sum.” 
There were no regular dealers, in this country 
at least, and we were not favoured with the 
showers of catalogues which pour forth from 
London, Paris, New York, Chicago, Berlin, 
and even Syracuse, N. Y. Auction sales 
there were, but not many. The collector’s 
task in those days was far different from that 
of present times and required something 




Gbe autograph flfcarket 


91 


more than a laudable curiosity and a plethoric 
bank account. It will be observed, however, 
that Doctor Sprague did not resort to any of 
Mr. Mendenhall's “subterfuges." He asked 
plainly for what he wanted, and being a 
doctor of divinity of well-earned repute, he 
generally got what he asked for. He himself 
was generous in his gifts to others. 

Mr. Mendenhall naively assures us that an 
“almost necessary adjunct and incentive to 
the collector is a good biographical dictionary ." 
I like that idea of an “incentive"; it cheers 
me to fancy a collector, his enthusiasm fired 
by a dictionary, sallying forth for an attack 
upon the great, with his biographical compen¬ 
dium in one hand and his precious album in 
the other, reading as he runs some such item 
as: “Dickens, Charles: celebrated novelist. 
Bom 1812," and exclaiming, “Oh, yes! Must 
have him. Let me see, where does he live? 
Oh, confound it—he ’s dead. Must hunt up 
his family." 

And then, poor youth—for surely he is a 
youth—he must have “a catalogue of every 
signature and letter, as well as of all duplicates, 




92 IRambles in Hutograpb Tlanb 


enabling him to turn to any specimen in a 
moment.” It will be observed that he ignores 
documents and author’s manuscripts entirely. 
Why, a true collector, even if he has his 
thousands of letters and documents, ought to 
be able to lay his hand on the one he seeks, 
in the dark. I do not mean to be understood 
as disparaging the value of a catalogue; it is 
a good thing to have as a record; but not worth 
much as a guide to locality, if the autographs 
are properly classified. One of the great 
pleasures is to shift them about, to rearrange 
them, “fuss” over them—not disturbing the 
classification—and when you do that, you 
quickly make mince-meat of your index- 
catalogue. But perhaps I am wrong; I often 
am. Each man must have his own way with 
his collection, although it may be made up 
chiefly of “signatures.” He may even frame 
his specimens, put glass over them, and hang 
them on the wall. I once had a D.S. of an old 
Pensylvania Governor which some one had 
treated in that preposterous fashion. 

Possibly there are some who think it a 
horrible waste to spend money for autographs. 




Gbe Hutograpb flDarfcet 93 


My experience teaches me that in this world 
we seldom get much of value without, in 
some way, paying money for it, and it seems 
to me that to purchase and pay for what we 
acquire is considerably more praiseworthy 
and respectable than to go about begging for it. 
The late Laurence Hutton—peace to his 
ashes!—would never tolerate in his portfolios 
an autograph letter not written to him per¬ 
sonally and, of course, without solicitation. 
But he did not consider himself a collector, 
and he had an unusually large number of 
literary people in the circle of his friendship, 
so that his was a peculiar case. On the same 
principle, perhaps, he should have limited the 
contents of his delightful library to books 
given to him by the author, but he was fond of 
books and I do not believe that he cared much 
for autographs; he had quite a number of 
them, but appeared to regard them as mere 
interesting incidents. As opposed to Hutton 
Mr. Broadley is so tender of letters written 
to himself that he says in his preface: “I shall 
carefully refrain from using any letter which 
has ever been addressed to me personally.” 




94 Gambles in Hutoorapb Xanb 


True, Broadley was referring to the printing 
of them while Hutton was thinking only of the 
keeping of them, but so far as their privacy 
is concerned the principle is practically the 
same, and the two men simply looked at the 
question from different points of view. 

It would be an extraordinary thing, and in 
fact an undesirable thing, if all men were in 
agreement about collecting. A few days ago 
I read that Lafcadio Hearn’s “ life-hobbv—• 
or doraku as the Japanese call it—was the 
collecting of Japanese pipes, which made a 
sentimental appeal to him.” Pipes of any 
kind, Japanese or otherwise, seem queer 
objects of desire and not likely to kindle 
sentiment in the hearts of most people, but 
they did in Hearn’s and that was enough. It 
is gratifying to have a new word in the place 
of that ugly one, 4 ‘hobby”; “fad” is not much 
better and lacks dignity. “Doraku” has a 
more convincing sound, although the obtuse 
person might imagine that it is something to 
eat or a new sort of disease. It evidently 
means a little more than “hobby.” Perhaps 
the collecting of autographs might be 



Cbe Hutograpb flfcarhet 


95 


“doraku,” the collecting of “Signers" a 
'‘hobby," and the collecting of Signers' let¬ 
ters dated in 1776 a “fad." Doubtless the 
unhumorous and serious-minded folk who 
devote their energies to the present-day 
“doraku" of uplifting humanity, would call 
it all nonsense. 

Provokingly exasperating is the pervasive 
perversity of people who ought to know better. 
At a dinner given this winter to a well-known 
playwright, the guest of honour was moved to 
tell a tale, one of those merry after-dinner 
tales we know so well, about a critic who at 
another dinner given to Sir Gilbert Parker, 
asked that eminent literary and parliamentary 
gentleman for his autograph on a card. 
“What!" said the dramatist to the critic, 
“you are not collecting autographs at your 
time of life!" The point of the side-splitting 
story was that the critic replied that he had to 
make a speech and wished to be able to say 
that he had read something Sir Gilbert had 
written. But to me the real point was that 
the writer of plays considered it to be a matter 
of course that the collector of autographs must 




96 IRamWes in autograph Xanb 


be a juvenile person, not beyond the years of 
indiscretion. He was thinking again of the 
signature collector, whose accumulations bear 
about the same relation to a veritable collec¬ 
tion as a baby’s picture-blocks bear to the 
contents of the Pitti Palace or of the Louvre 
before it lost the Mona Lisa; I will not say, 
as the latest play by Augustus Thomas to a 
drama of Shakespeare, for that would seem 
ill-natured. 

Even educated persons often know little 
and care less about autographs. A well- 
known Boston collector told me of an accom¬ 
plished lady who said to him that she 
“wanted so much to look at his book of auto¬ 
graphs .” He has one hundred and sixty-five 
volumes of them; she thought he had an 
album! Some months ago a clever and 
manifestly intelligent young man representing 
one of our leading journals called upon me for 
the declared purpose of finding out what one 
of my autographs was my particular favourite, 
the newspaper readers of the metropolis hav¬ 
ing, no doubt, an inexplicable yearning for 
that important bit of information. “That is 




Gbe autograph fIDarftet 9 7 


a difficult question to answer,” I timidly ven¬ 
tured to say. “If you want to know which 
one I longest sought, which one gave me the 
most anxiety and perturbation of spirit, the 
most troublesome in the procuring, which 
one caused the greatest diminution in the 
amount of my bank-balance—I will tell you, 
but in all probability you will not be able to 
tell me who the man was. It was the auto¬ 
graph of Button Gwinnett.” His counte¬ 
nance assumed a blank expression as he 
said, “I never heard of him.” 

To the collector it brought back the old 
story of the man on the railway train who 
insisted upon talking to a surly and uncom¬ 
municative stranger about Grant when that 
distinguished soldier was occupying the White 
House. ‘‘ Grant! Who ’s Grant ? ’’ growled 
the stranger. “Why, the President.” “Pres¬ 
ident of what?” “President of the United 
States.” “Oh.” Yet why should the juve¬ 
nile reporter, a young man of the present, 
know anything of Button Gwinnett? It was 
almost an accident that he signed the Declara¬ 
tion of Independence; and in less than a 




98 IRambles in autograph Xanh 


year afterwards he fell a victim to the pistol of 
his fellow-Georgian, Lachlan McIntosh. It 
seems strange nevertheless that in his forty- 
five years of life he left so few written evidences 
of his existence. He was a merchant in Bris¬ 
tol, England, and was engaged in business in 
Savannah. He filled several important offi¬ 
cial positions. Yet there is no holograph 
letter of his in existence, so far as I know. I 
fondly believe that somewhere in the regions 
of the South unexplored by Elliott Danforth 
or other keen sportsmen, there may yet be 
found some documents at least to reward the 
huntsman and to bring down many points 
the market value of my poor little signature. 




CHAPTER VI 

PRIVATE VENDORS AND THEIR WAYS 

Troubles with Private Vendors—Their Peculiarities—A L. S. 
and L.S.—Collecting Fosters theVirtues—Rogers’s Collection 
—Contentment of Collectors—Their Patience—C. De F. 
Bums and his Ways—Covetousness—Feminine Collectors 
—Faith and Hope. 

I am extremely averse to the giving of 
unsolicited advice; a lawyer usually is, because 
he expects not only that his counsel will be 
asked if it is wanted, but that it will be paid 
for. Yet I cannot refrain from advising the 
autograph collector, if he values his time and 
his peace of mind, to keep his “doraku” a 
secret from the world, disclosing it only to 
intimate friends or to those trusted dealers 
who minister to his cravings. If his mania 
becomes known to mankind at large or at 
least to that considerable fraction which 
reads the newspapers, he will be beset by 


99 


ioo IRambles in autograph Xanb 


hordes of people who possess what they 
fondly regard as gems of purest ray serene 
but who are willing to dispose of them—for 
a price. As a rule this price would be 
high for even a holograph letter of Shakes¬ 
peare or for the original marriage contract 
of Adam and Eve. Most of these would- 
be vendors have had their imaginations 
aroused by finding in the newspapers oc¬ 
casional chronicles of sales of autographs 
for enormous sums, and really believe that 
the autograph of a person whose name is 
familiar to the world must necessarily be 
more valuable than that of a man not so 
famous; they would be surprised to learn what 
Mr. Benjamin lately disclosed to the Sun and 
which I found out by personal experience, 
that a letter of Mr. Alfred Moore, an obscure 
Justice of the Supreme Court at the close of 
the eighteenth century, commands ten times 
the price of a fairly good letter of Chief Justice 
Marshall. Indeed, to advert to the odious 
matter of cost, I paid a larger sum for my 
Moore letter than I did for the autographs of 
all the Justices and Chief Justices of the Court 




IPrftmte Den&ore anb tbeir Ha?6 ioi 


from John Jay to Brewer, and there were 
some choice letters among them too. 

I heard lately of a Boston lady who had a 
letter of Oliver Wendell Holmes—the Auto¬ 
crat, not the Judge—for which she wanted the 
modest sum of three hundred dollars! In the 
majority of such cases of amusing overvalua¬ 
tion, the parties are acting in entire good faith. 
But a few weeks ago a lady wrote to me offer¬ 
ing to dispose of what she manifestly deemed 
to be precious relics—a White House card 
with the signature of Grover Cleveland and 
another with that of Mrs. Cleveland. To her 
they were worth a great deal, and I scarcely 
had the heart to tell her that they would be 
dear at a dollar apiece; in fact it would be 
almost extravagant to pay that much for 
them. To private collectors such offers are 
mere nuisances, and the unfortunate indi¬ 
vidual who accidentally becomes the victim of 
them is wise if he has a set of cards printed 
to be sent to applicants, declining to consider 
their proposals. 

Another reason why the inexperienced col¬ 
lector should be cautious about the private 




102 IRambles In Hutograpb Xant> 


vendor is, that as a rule those vendors are 
wholly unable to distinguish between a full 
autograph letter and a mere "letter signed.” 
It is often extremely difficult for even an expert 
to decide. The letter of John Hart, the New 
Jersey Signer, which I have in my own col¬ 
lection is the one reproduced in facsimile in 
Brotherhead’s book, but it is there called 
“ A.L.S.,” which I hope it is—-although I am in 
doubt about it, and so was the conscientious 
dealer from whom I procured it. Hart had a 
secretary who wrote very much like him, and 
a comparison of the signature, which is genu¬ 
ine beyond dispute, and the body of the letter 
indicates some differences which make one 
suspect that the secretary is responsible for all 
but the signature. Almost every one knows 
that many letters which pass for those of 
Washington were really written by his aids, 
who, consciously or unconsciously, imitated 
the General’s bold and flowing chirography. 
One of these letters was offered to me very 
lately, by a lady—the ladies seem to have a 
virtual monopoly of that sort of business—■ 
who sincerely believed that she was the pos- 




private Denture ant) tbeir XKIia^s 103 


sessor of a full autograph war letter; but she 
was utterly mistaken. Reputable dealers will 
not be thus misled nor will they mislead their 
customers. Hence I obtrude another bit of 
unsolicited advice—beware of the private 
vendor! 

As I was about to say, when I was inter¬ 
rupted by a gentleman who has a veritable 
signature of Albert Edward, Prince of Wales, 
which he is willing to part with for a considera¬ 
tion, the amount whereof would be large for 
• even a Kate Greenaway or an Oscar Wilde 
(which for some occult reason command stu¬ 
pendous prices just now), I verily believe that 
the pursuit of autographs encourages and 
develops most of the important virtues. I 
have been told by one of those benefactors of 
the human race, a frank friend, that the truly 
great do not collect them, at least in modern 
times. When I cite Mr. Morgan, I am assured 
that, strictly speaking, he is not a mere auto¬ 
graph collector, but collects everything that is 
worthy in books, pictures, tapestries, all sorts 
of art treasures, and occasionally banks and 
railways; he buys very rare manuscripts as he 




io4 IRamblea in autograph Xanfc 


buys Coptic records, and delights not in the 
cheaper things which so often bring gladness 
to the heart of us comparative paupers. 
When I ponder over it I am not sure that the 
frank friend is altogether wrong. True, we 
have had Doctor Sprague and Bishop Hurst, 
excellent divines; Doctor Emmet, our Nestor; 
and, as we have seen, we numbered in our 
ranks the genial gentleman who wrote “I 
Wandered by the Brookside,” and who was 
referred to by Sir George Trevelyan as 

He whom men call Baron Houghton 

But the gods call Dicky Milnes. 

I recall that Sir Leslie Stephen when visiting 
this country in the early days of the rebellion 
was profoundly disgusted with the Honourable 
William H. Seward because when Stephen was 
talking of “ Mr. Mill ’’—JohnStuart Mill—Sew¬ 
ard thought he was speaking of “Mr. Milnes.” 
I am silly enough to prefer talking about 
Dicky Milnes to discussing that object of my 
personal hostility, the professional philosopher. 

Then we have Samuel Rogers, of whose 




private IDenbors anb tbeir TOa?e 105 


collection a pleasant reminiscence may be 
found in William Allen Butler’s Retrospect of 
Forty Years , recently published. Mr. Butler 
tells us of the banker-poet’s “splendid three- 
page letter of Washington to Hamilton written 
when he was deliberating whether to serve 
the second presidential term.” In these days 
he would not deliberate even about a third 
term, but would take without hesitation as 
many cups of coffee as the pot would hold. 
There were also letters of Mozart, of Charles 
James Fox, Byron and Scott, and indeed of 
most of Rogers’s “illustrious contemporaries,” 
as well as a part of the manuscript of Waverly; 
truly “a rare collection,” as Mr. Butler calls it. 

Still, without argument or disputatious con¬ 
tention, let us concede that men of conspicuous 
strength, originality, and intellectual force 
do not “collect autographs.” The occupation 
is a promoter of contentment, a commendable 
virtue, although somewhat out of fashion. A 
discontented man can never be a good auto¬ 
graph collector, and almost every one now 
seems to be discontented about something. 
Large numbers of people who would ordinarily 




io6 IRamblee In Hutograpb Xanb 


be quite well satisfied with their condition and 
circumstances are in the way of being stirred 
up by trouble-finders who are looking for 
trouble—and offices. I think it is creditable 
to the tribe that no autograph collector, as 
far as I can remember, ever effected an alleged 
“reform’’ or headed a sanguinary revolution. 
The collector is a peaceful, contemplative 
person, as one must be who studies his letters 
and manuscripts and reflects upon all the toil, 
strife, and struggles of the men who wrote the 
pages over which he pores, and upon the futil¬ 
ity of most of their strivings. How excited they 
became over what, if in their present state they 
take cognisance of mundane things, they must 
now regard as trivial and insignificant. In 
reading of some of the disputes and squabbles 
whose existence is revealed in the old letters 
of statesmen and of authors, one thinks of 
the famous quatrain attributed to a tired 
mother: 


The cow is in the hammock, 

The calf is in the lake, 

The baby’s in the garbage-can, 
What difference does it make? 




private IDenbors anb tbeir Ways 107 


I once quoted those lines to a foreigner dis¬ 
posed to pessimism, and he remarked with 
the bland and pitying smile of a foreigner 
engaged in wrestling with an example of 
American humour, “Vot vas the baby doing 
in the garbage-can?” When Martin Van 
Buren wrote that Autobiography never yet 
printed, the manuscript of which rests placidly 
in the Congressional Library, and which, 
like most autobiographies, was never finished, 
he devoted long and dreary pages to the dis¬ 
putes between him and Louis McLane, which 
are indescribably tedious to readers of this 
generation, few of whom have the most remote 
idea of who Louis McLane was, and all of 
whom would find the quarrels of politicians 
eighty or more years ago as uninteresting as 
an old Patent Office Report. 

It cannot fail to foster a spirit of content¬ 
ment in our own bosoms when we observe the 
anger which often disturbs celestial minds, 
and we congratulate ourselves that their woes 
are not ours and perceive that at the most 
those woes were not of much consequence. 
The most amusing of all are the wailings of 




io8 IRamblea in Butograpb Xanb 


disappointed politicians; some lamentations 
are mildly pathetic, like the records of the 
pecuniary distresses of Thomas De Quincey, 
from whose letters one may infer that he knew 
a great deal more about financial affairs than 
his friends supposed. By reading two or 
three of them I have been led to believe that 
his sublime ignorance of money matters might 
have been in some degree affected—for a 
purpose, not so sinister or contemptible as 
that of Harold Skimpole, but of a similar 
nature. 

Another virtue fostered by autograph col¬ 
lecting is that of patience. It is a soul- 
trying experience to wait for months—nay, 
years—to find a satisfactory letter of a person 
needed to make a “set” complete; to come 
upon the description of one in a London 
catalogue, for example; to order it forthwith 
by mail, cable messages being somewhat 
expensive for the ordinary collector, and to 
receive some weeks later the announcement 
beginning like so many of the British-Boer 
war despatches, “We regret to inform you,” 
etc., etc. Gone! We feel sorry that we 




private IDenbors ant> tbeir Mavs 109 


cannot look that purchaser in the eye and tell 
him—well, as Dr. Francis Landey Patton 
euphemistically expressed it on a recent occa¬ 
sion, address to him “a peremptory command 
about his destiny.” But we only sigh regret¬ 
fully and reflect that we should have cabled; 
and begin again the patient search of lists 
and catalogues. In days gone by I was often 
tempted to indulge in deplorable invective 
because of the rigorous principles of my much 
esteemed friend, the late Charles De Forest 
Bums, who was a skilled buyer in the time 
when Plancus was Consul, and when I was 
devoting more attention to the works, prosaic 
and poetic, of the friends of Consul Plancus 
than to the subject of autographs. Mr. 
Bums was a severe critic, and made it a rule 
never to buy, as principal or agent, any auto¬ 
graph that was (a) in bad condition, (b) of 
doubtful authenticity, or (c) “run up” to a 
price higher than he, Bums, thought was fair 
and just, and his ideas of prices were formed 
before the cost of autographs had gone up in 
sympathy with the cost of living. To him 
a Thomas Lynch, Jr., signature was dear at 



no IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


$100 and the fact that some dealer asked $400 
for it, and that there were those who ought to 
be glad to get it at that price, did not affect 
his opinion in the slightest degree. The stem, 
honest old Roman would growl when his 
reasonable bid was exceeded, but he was 
inflexible. Many a time and oft I have re¬ 
ceived from him the message, “It was not in 
good condition and it went at an absurdly 
high price”; and so I lost it, whatever it was, 
although I had established no limit, and I 
would murmur, with a faint recollection of 
schoolday tasks, “Quousque tandem, Cata¬ 
lina,” with something about “patientia 
nostra.” But one felt that the veteran could 
always be trusted, and our trust in our fellow- 
man, like almost all the other trusts, seems 
to be in danger of being utterly destroyed 
nowadays. 

There may be some slight foundation for 
the charge that the collector occasionally 
lapses into the sin of covetousness. It is not 
envy. When we find that the unpleasant 
character known as “another”—the one whom 
the object of our youthful affections usually 




private IDenbors anf> tbeir Map m 


loves in preference to ourselves—possesses 
the letter or manuscript we long to call our 
own, we do not envy him, but we cannot help 
coveting his treasure. It is not, however, that 
odious form of covetousness which leads men 
to slay and to rob. I have coveted exceed¬ 
ingly some of the fine things in the British 
Museum, but not to the extent of wishing 
to destroy the Museum or even to break the 
glass in its windows—a manifestation of 
uncontrollable desideration permitted only to 
“the female of the species.” This reminds me 
of the rarity of feminine autograph collectors; 
they exist, but there are not many of them. 
Perhaps if they had more autographs they 
would not be so crazy about voting. I fear 
that if they finally obtain the glorious privilege 
of going to the polls and putting in their 
ballots with those of Micky and Giuseppe and 
Sambo, not to speak of Biddy and Topsy and 
Maria Lucia, they may feel about it as I some¬ 
times do after acquiring a long-sought-for 
autograph, that it is not after all such a 
wonderful thing as I thought it was, and that 
there are multitudes of other things more 




112 IRambles in autograph Xanfc 


worth having. In boyhood I yearned much for 
cream-cakes, and once, on receiving from an 
opulent and generous uncle an unexpected 
half-dollar, I immediately expended the entire 
amount of my fortune in the purchase of 
cream-cakes. Thereafter, for a considerable 
period of time, I abhorred the very sight of a 
cream-cake. Possibly it may be so with the 
suffragists. 

But it is better to stray back to the more 
attractive subject of virtues; to most people, 
except “Progressive” and peripatetic orators, 
it is pleasanter to talk about virtues than 
about vices. The collector is distinguished 
for faith, hope, and charity. Sometimes his 
faith is so great that he will accept a specimen 
bearing a date some years after that of the 
demise of the individual who is credited with 
its authorship. Most of us can boast of ex¬ 
amples of such posthumous activity. Car¬ 
lyle once wrote of a letter ascribed to Frederick 
the Great, “I know abundantly little of 
Frederick’s autograph signature, but this 
cannot be his, being dated about ten years 
after his death.” I can point to some which 




private U)ent>ore anb tbeir Hap 113 


on their face purport to have been written 
some years before the birth of their putative 
parent. Hope, which springs eternal in the 
collector’s breast, fondly cherished although 
often unfulfilled, is familiar to us. We have 
charity for all, even for those who write to us 
from divers quarters of the habitable globe 
offering gems of great price, such as “franks” 
of British noblemen, authentic signatures of 
Mr. and Mrs. Grover Cleveland actually 
penned at the White House, holograph letters 
of Washington written by aides-de-camp, and 
albums adorned by the chirography of Con¬ 
gressmen. We are careful to answer all these 
communications and waste our surplus in pay¬ 
ing postage, and are often more than repaid 
for our trouble by the generous acts of others, 
as, in my case, when the distinguished and 
kindly New York banker with his own hands 
delivered to me a beautiful manuscript of 
Rudyard Kipling, which would be an ornament 
to any collection. Such an act of benefi¬ 
cence makes up for all the time and trouble 
devoted to inconsequential correspondence. 

Apropos of blind faith, I lately bought an 





114 IRambles in Hutograpb %ant> 


inkstand said to have belonged to General 
Burgoyne and to Daniel Webster, together 
with a quill pen used by the godlike Daniel, 
merely because the vendor informed me that 
the tale was true; and even the fact that the 
quill manifestly came from a bird of extremely 
modem origin has not shaken my confidence 
—in the inkstand. But why should he have 
lugged in Webster? The inkstand looks as if 
it might have been the property of Julius 
Caesar, and the seller might have added the 
assurance that the goose was one of the 
immortal flock which saved the Capitol. 




CHAPTER VII 


COLLECTORS AND THEIR METHODS 


Courtesy to Collectors—Miss Braddon—Longfellow—Holmes— 
Bryant—Napier of Magdala—Mrs. Fields—Bryan Waller 
Procter—Robert Southey—Rideing’s Story about John 
Watson—Gladstone and Robert G. Ingersoll—Laurence 
Hutton and his Characteristics. 


Reprehensible though it may be to write 
to eminent persons for their autographs, yet 
the practice is not wholly without benefit; for 
occasionally it induces a revelation of the 
true character of the recipient. Some men 
are impatient and fretful at such requests, 
some are pleased—considering them as testi¬ 
monials to their greatness—and some are so 
kindly by nature that they are willing to 
suffer inconvenience in order not to give 
offence or wound the feelings of others. I 
have cited elsewhere some examples of the 
divers forms of reply proceeding from dis- 


116 IRambles in autograph Xanfc 


tinguished individuals—Stevenson, Kipling, 
Froude, Horace Mann, Lord Rosebery, George 
F. Watts, and others, and shall not reproduce 
them. 

Miss Braddon, once famous but not well- 
remembered now, writes rather gracefully 
and she certainly 1 * aimed to please. ’’ She said : 

Dear sir :—The kindly enthusiasm of my American 
readers brings me so many applications for autographs 
that you must please to forgive my long neglect of 
your letters. Your perseverance under discourage¬ 
ment certainly deserves the poor reward of these few 
lines. Nothing in my literary career has been more 
pleasing to me than the recognition of the American 
public. I trust I may live to see your vast and most 
interesting country. 

Very truly yours— 

M. E. Braddon 

Richmond. 

England. 

April 15, 1875. 


Mr. Broadley quotes several of my illus¬ 
trations of the rule which seems to prevail— 
the greater the man, the greater the gentleness 
and courtesy. The innate graciousness of 
Longfellow and of Holmes in the matter of 
autographs has been referred to; I am sorry 




Collectors anb tbeir HDetbobs 117 


that Lowell was so surly about it. This 
surliness goes to show why Lowell was the 
object of admiration rather than of affection, 
and why even those who know the men only 
by their writings become personally fond of 
Holmes and Longfellow but not of James 
Russell Lowell. 

Whatever may be the contemporary esti¬ 
mate of Longfellow as a poet, it cannot be 
denied that his character as a man remains a 
precious possession of his countrymen. He 
was most indulgent towards the throng of 
bores which beset him without mercy. The 
applicants for autographs were never re¬ 
pulsed, but were promptly answered with an 
enclosed signature, “ already prepared in ad¬ 
vance in a moment of leisure.” To some of 
the most inconsiderate he often sent a slip 
which he had caused to be printed for the 
benefit of the careless, giving them a piece of 
advice which one not familiar with the ways 
of the autograph hunter would scarcely think 
necessary. “In applying for an autograph, 
always enclose an addressed and stamped 
envelope.” It is related of him that “for 





118 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


hours of a morning he would be at his table 
writing scores of autographs for far-away 
strangers/’ In his Journal under the date of 
January 9, 1857, he writes: “Yesterday I 
wrote, sealed, and directed seventy auto¬ 
graphs. To-day I added five or six more and 
mailed them. ’ ’ 11 Such patience,’’ well says one 
of his biographers, “ might spring in part from 
fondness for even undiscriminating admiration; 
but it arose still more from unfailing benignity 
of nature. Why should people wish to see him, 
or have his autograph, except to add a pleasure 
to their lives? The pleasure was granted in 
every case that was at all reasonable.” 

He tells of one letter from a person wholly 
unknown to him, which he would not answer; 
and silence was surely the most charitable 
response. The applicant said: 


Now I want you to write me a few lines for a young 
lady’s album, to be written as an Acrostic to read 
My Dearest One . If you will please imagine yourself 
a young man loving a beautiful young lady, who has 
promised to be his wife, and then write as you would 
for yourself, you will much oblige one who has been 
an ardent admirer of your poems. 



Collectors anb tbeir flDetbobs 119 


The postscript to this modest request was, 
“Send bill.” 

The Autocrat was another victim of cor¬ 
respondents. “ It was not simply the swarm¬ 
ing autograph hunters, like mosquitoes rising 
from the limitless breeding-grounds of summer 
marshes,” says Mr. Morse, with that rhetori¬ 
cal exuberance which second-class people are 
so fond of pouring forth when they deal with 
the tribe; so that there were other and more 
burdensome petitions to try the temper of the 
good Doctor. Mr. Morse adds: 


No album or collection of autographs went without 
his signature; he said once that if it should retain any 
value at all, at least it would be the cheapest autograph 
on the dealers’ catalogues. James Russell Lowell, 
who pursued a different plan, grumbled at him because 
Holmes’s amiable ways made it so hard for the others. 


Morse was manifestly thinking only of the 
signature seeker, and the Doctor was mis¬ 
taken about the money value of his autograph, 
which is always considerable. When Holmes 
was seventy-eight he wrote to Mr. DeWolfe 
Howe: 




i2o Gambles in autograph Xanh 


I am what my friends the autograph hunters called 
a “noted person,” sometimes perhaps “notorious,” 
but I am not quite sure of this. They also remind 
me that I am advanced in life and not likely to be 
good for autographs much longer, so that it would 
be the civil thing in me to hurry up my signature 
before it is too late. 

This was of course, a bit of humorous exag¬ 
geration; for so tender was he of the “ auto¬ 
graph hunters” that he not only furnished his 
own cheerfully, but actually helped them to 
obtain the autographs of others, as appears 
from one of the letters of which I am fondest 
—given in full in one of my works of great 
learning but of limited circulation. I am 
tempted to quote it again, in the hope that 
now some one may read it: 


Beverly Farms, Mass., August 21, 1879. 
My dear Longfellow:— 

I send you a letter of Mr. Frederick Locker with a 
request which I know you will comply with. The 
daughter he refers to, as you may remember, married 
Tennyson's son. If you would have the kindness, 
after writing the lines marked for yourself, to send the 
whole, letter and all, to Emerson, he to Whittier, and 
Whittier to me, I should feel in sending back the 
manuscript that I had made Mr. Locker happy; 




Collectors anb tbeir flbetbobs 121 


and that I should be glad to do for he has shown me 
much kindness, though I have never seen him. I 
cannot help the fact that his letter has a few compli¬ 
mentary words about myself—you can skip those, 
if you will read the rest. 

Always faithfully yours, 

0. W. Holmes. 


Doctor Holmes could not have written the 
Commemoration Ode or the Biglow Papers , 
the latter now so nearly forgotten; but Lowell 
could never have written that letter, for the 
warmth of it did not lie in his heart. 

Dr. Holmes’s readiness to assist others in 
procuring autographs recalls a letter of another 
American poet which I am fortunate enough 
to possess. On June 27, 1843, Bryant wrote 
to Israel K. Tefft, one of the pioneer collectors 
in this country: 


I was diligent in looking up Professor Robinson on 
my ret rn to New York that I might secure the auto¬ 
graph of Luther for you, but he had already disposed 
of it. It was a paper which contained the hand¬ 
writing both of Luther and Melancthon. He said, 
however, that he would look up for me the autographs 
of several eminent modern German scholars which he 
possessed and give them to me for you. I accepted 




i22 iRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


his offer of course, and last evening I called in hopes 
of getting the autographs, but he was not in, and Mrs. 
Robinson told me that he had been too busy to look 
for them. I hope to have the pleasure of forwarding 
them to you hereafter. 


The only autograph of Luther I have ever 
seen was, strangely enough, in the Vatican. 

Even a distinguished soldier does not dis¬ 
dain to be helpful, as is shown by a brief note 
from Baron Napier of Magdala. I am curious 
to know what particular autograph he had 
in mind, but do not see how it may ever be 
revealed to me. 


8 Seville Street. 

Lowndes Square S.W. 

December 17th. 


Dear Sir— 

I send you for your collection an autograph which 
is not too plentiful even with us. 

Yours very faithfully, 
Napier of Magdala 


But kindness is sometimes grossly abused. 
I once saw a letter of Hawthorne in which he 
said some indignant things about applications 
to him for letters written to him by men of 




Collectors anb tbeir fIDetbobs 123 


importance, and Mrs. James T. Fields writes 
with ill-concealed irritation: 

My dear sir: 

I am sorry to say that I cannot give away any 
letters. Believe me 

Very truly, 

A. Fields 

148 Charles Street. 

Boston, April 14th. 


Such gifts must not be solicited; they must 
be voluntary benefactions. I do not know 
of a more generous one than that which is 
recorded of Bryan Waller Procter to an 
American friend. Procter was talking with 
him about Charles Lamb, while looking over 
some Lamb letters. Selecting one, Procter 
said, “I will give you this one. Cram it in 
your pocket, for I hear my wife coming down¬ 
stairs, and perhaps she won’t let you carry it 
off.” 

Robert Southey, one of the most lovable of 
all men of letters, an indefatigable worker, 
most economical of his time, always found 
opportunity to attend to his correspondence, 
as the busiest men usually do. It is generally 




i24 IRambles in Hutoarapb %ant> 


the idle who have “no time to write.” He 
advocated playfully the forming of a “Society 
.for the Suppression of Albums,” a laudable 
enterprise; but when a certain Mr. Samuel 
Simpson of Liverpool begged from him a few 
lines in his handwriting “to fill a vacancy in 
his collection of autographs, without which 
his series must remain for ever most incom¬ 
plete,” he answered merrily in verse which 
must have won the heart of Simpson: 

Inasmuch as you, Sam, a descendant of Sim, 

For collecting handwritings have taken a whim, 

And to me, Robert Southey, petition have made, 

In a civil and nicely-penned letter—post-paid— 
That I to your album so gracious would be 
As to fill up a page there appointed for me, 

Five couplets I send you, by aid of the Nine— 

They will cost you in postage a penny a line: 

At Keswick, October the sixth, they were done, 

One thousand eight hundred and twenty and one. 

It is instructive to observe the contrast 
between the men of might and the lesser 
figures in the world of literature: the loudest 
grumbling, the most plaintive wails, proceed 
from the lower ranks when it is a question of 
autographs. They appear to fancy that it is 




Collectors anb tbeir flOetbobe 125 


a smart thing to sneer at a collector. I found 
an example lately in a book called Many 
Celebrities and a Few Others by Mr. William 
H. Rideing, a worthy purveyor of common¬ 
places for magazines, in which he favours us 
with a tale told to him by Mr. John Watson 
concerning a silly young man who stared at 
Watson on a steamer. He makes Watson 
say that the youth was either a reader of the 
Ian Maclaren books “or an autograph hunter. 
He can wait. They are always with us, like 
the poor.” I refuse to believe that Watson 
ever said it: he would not have repeated that 
weak, wretched, worn-out jest about “the 
poor.” That arrow never came out of Ian 
Maclaren’s quiver; it is manifestly the product 
of Mr. Rideing’s genius. I am emboldened 
in my scepticism by a little evidence from 
another chapter of the book, devoted to an 
exposition of the author’s intimacy with 
Gladstone. Referring to a discussion of Chris¬ 
tianity between Gladstone and Robert Inger- 
soll, in the North American Review , Mr. 
Rideing makes Gladstone say to him in an 
alleged familiar conversation: “I wish I had 




126 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


not written that article on Mr. Ingersoll. I 
feel as if I had had a tussle with a chimney¬ 
sweep.” As a matter of fact, Mr. Gladstone 
once wrote a letter to Mr. Rideing, who had 
some editorial connection with the North 
American Review , dated in London, July 23, 
1888, in which he said: 

In considering your letter I have thought that a 
note such as the inclosed would answer your purpose 
and would be my best mode of action. I could not 
indeed well go beyond it, for I feel that there is some¬ 
thing of the same objection to a literary contact with 
Col. Ingersoll as to a scuffle with a chimney sweep. 

I doubt whether Mr. Gladstone was guilty 
of such a parrot-like repetition of the same 
idea; of course, it may be like the “huma” 
incident related by the Autocrat; but I think 
Mr. Rideing was recalling his letter and not a 
conversation. I have the letter, for Mr. 
Rideing sold his letters from time to time. 

Mr. Gladstone wrote as he did of Ingersoll 
without accurate knowledge; he was deceived 
by some slave of prejudice. I knew Colonel 
Ingersoll; and while I have no sympathy with 
the views which he proclaimed in regard to 




Collectors anb tbeir flfcetbobs 127 


religion and to Christianity, I always found 
him a charming man, of attractive personal 
qualities, and I had many opportunities of 
judging. I doubt if any one could have been 
long in his society without having an affection 
for him. He was a poet by nature; he was a 
real orator; he had an abundant sense of 
humour. In all these respects he was Glad¬ 
stone's superior. I have always believed that, 
although he was execrated by the “unco’ guid” 
as a blatant infidel, he thought more deeply 
and more constantly on religious topics than 
the vast majority of his critics. 

There lives more faith in honest doubt, 

Believe me, than in half the creeds.” 

Some reference has been made to Laurence 
Hutton and the peculiar views he entertained 
or professed to entertain regarding autographs. 
After his lamented death eight years ago, a 
book was published, dictated by him in the 
latter part of his life, entitled Talks in a 
Library with Laurence Hutton , one chapter of 
which is devoted to Autographs. Hutton was 
a genial man, with many amiable qualities, 




128 IRambles in autograph ILanh 


but even those who knew him best must ad¬ 
mit that he was profoundly self-centred; his 
egotism however was more amusing than 
offensive. It permeated all that he wrote; 
events were important if they happened to 
him , and men were of importance if he knew 
them. The Hutton motif is always dominant; 
his family, his friends, his dogs, his belongings 
were always in the foreground. He begins 
his autographic disquisitions with dicta which 
I have often heard him deliver orally: 

“ Autographisers,” as Dibdin once, and a little 
disrespectfully, spoke of them, may be divided into 
four distinct classes—the Buyers, the Beggars, the 
Stealers, and the Receivers. The first study the 
catalogues; they order by mail or by wire; sometimes 
they exchange, and they always pay full prices. They 
find profit and, no doubt, a certain amount of pleasure 
in their hunting and angling for letters and signatures. 
They bag their game, and they catch their fish, ready 
cooked. It is often the rarest of fish and game. But 
it is not sport. 

This is pretty thin. Inasmuch as he, later 
on, excoriates Beggars and Stealers, it follows 
that it is only the “Receivers,” as he calls 
them, who enjoy real sport. I wonder what 





Laurence Hutton 

From a painting from life by Dora Wheeler Keith 


















Collectors anb tbeir flDetbobs 129 


he meant by “sport”; an analysis of his sage 
expressions indicates that it depends merely 
on whether the game was “cooked” or raw. 
But what “sport” do the “Receivers” enjoy? 
If a man whom you know well sends you an 
agreeable letter, voluntarily and without so¬ 
licitation, where is the “sport?” To pursue 
the hunting analogy, there is about as much 
sport in it as there would be if a “lusty trout ” 
should leap from the pool and deposit himself 
in your basket, or if a “lordly lion” should 
stalk into your camp, recline peacefully at 
your feet, and signify that he was your 
personal property. 

The Huttonian point of view is revealed 
in his next paragraph: 


The real collector would not exchange a little note 
in his possession, written on the night of his election 
to the Century Club, containing the simple words, 
“Dear Mother Blank, your Boy is a Centurion,” and 
signed “Edwin” (Booth), for the manuscript of 
Washington’s Farewell Address; nor would he give 
a familiar letter of Bunner’s full of affectionate per¬ 
sonalities and closing “with love, as always, to the 
Wife,” for the sealed and signed Death Warrant of 
Lady Jane Grey. 




130 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


You might as well say that “a real collector” 
of portraits would not exchange a portrait 
of his mother for one of a great statesman by 
Sir Joshua Reynolds. It is all the Hutton 
way of telling us that Booth wrote a letter 
about him and that Bunner wrote a letter to 
him. He seems to have no idea at all of the 
true emotions of a collector. He had no 
adequate sense of proportion, but a good deal 
of harmless personal vanity. I do not know 
what connection there can be between Lady 
Jane Grey’s Death Warrant and a letter from 
Mr. Bunner, but I should think that any 
rational person would prefer owning the Death 
Warrant to the proprietorship of a Bunner 
letter even if it was written to Laurence 
Hutton. 

But really, he did not believe all this; he 
may have thought that he did, but in his 
heart he knew that it was only twaddle. 

For in what I have written here of Hutton, 
I do not intend by any means to utter words 
of disparagement; far from it. All men have 
their little vanities, but some hide them better 
than others. He enjoyed keenly the delights 




^ L, 

\k/^VK. 

.r* ^ u -^ ^ 

jW^ <**vnJs UsKiX. 5^ 

W^NN d* o$-*k 

\ 

1 ^VNy_^ s ' k > jn - C^x^s. $^\rv, Oo^Vs o*j^ Qn^M^ c^T^j 

* > ^V ^^Osjsi vA^J^U>- W-OsN^ <fV pv I 

A^^ ( V WaS^ | 

^ La^ VvC^ t (4^ | 

C^OXx ^ iNhos. *-, «. C>jyk 

^ W^Os |r^V^ K^^J* V-V. ^Sljpp/ , 

^ ^>N- 


^ ^vlKkj^ 




Last page of A. L. S. (5 pages) of Laurence Hutton, April 18, 1903 













Collectors anb tbeir fIDetbobs 131 

of good books, good art, good talk, and all 
that gratifies a cultured taste; but he would 
prize a snap-shot photograph of himself taken 
by some amateur crony much more than a 
portrait by Sargent, if he did not know Sar¬ 
gent very well. He had pride in his acquaint¬ 
ance with men of distinction; so much pride 
that he often gave the impression of having a 
sort of ownership of them. There was some¬ 
thing very winning in his appreciation of 
their kind words and friendly acts. This 
spirit of affectionate regard was so strong 
within him that he could not keep it from 
dominating his thoughts; and hence it was 
that he failed to comprehend the true passion 
of the collector and suffered the personal 
element to overshadow it completely. Most 
men have a reluctance about displaying, in a 
collection of autographs, an intimate personal 
letter addressed to themselves; it seems almost 
too sacred to be treated in such a quasi-public 
way. But there are so many varying opinions 
on such subjects that no hard and fast rule 
may be formulated. 





CHAPTER VIII 

MY OWN COLLECTION 

The Collection—Some Poets’ Autographs—Thomas Gray’s 
Manuscript—Charles Lloyd—His Letter to Southey—His 
Marriage—A Byron Manuscript—Letter of Byron’s Mother 
—Beattie—Edward Lear—Locker-Lampson—Thomas Hood 
—Robert Southey—Matthew Prior—Christina Rossetti— 
Tennyson to Bayard Taylor—Shelley—Bryan Waller 
Procter— Samuel Rogers. 

As I confidently expected from the begin¬ 
ning, I come to my own collection at last. I 
did my best to avoid it and hovered about it a 
little, but could not escape from it. The 
collector cannot refrain from gossiping about 
it any more than a modern statesman can 
abstain from talking about the infallible 
judgment of the people or than a philanthropic 
millionaire can cease from talking about 
himself. We all have our objects of idolatry, 
but we may indulge in the hope that we may 
discover when we are growing tiresome, 
132 



Thomas Gray 

From the engraving by T. Basire 






















ffl>£ ©wn Collection 


133 


although it is easy to be deceived on such a 
subject and I doubt whether a bore ever 
really finds out that he is a bore. Without 
pouring out the contents of many portfolios, 
we may look at a few, and they are neither 
the rarest nor the most important; and after 
all, if any one does not care to follow me in my 
rambles, the way of escape is open to him. 

In the "Poets’ Comer” reposes a manu¬ 
script of Thomas Gray, containing two short 
poems; and Horace Walpole has written at 
the top, "The following two poems were 
given to Mr. Jacob by (Miss Speed) Comtesse 
de Virri, who told him they [were] written 
by Mr. Gray.” Miss Harriet Speed is re¬ 
membered by students of Gray as the woman 
who furnished "the sole suggestion of romance 
in Gray’s life .” 1 The acquaintance began in 
this wise: Walpole showed to Lady Cobham, 
who lived at Stoke Manor House, the manu¬ 
script of the Elegy and she persuaded her 

1 “At one time,” says Mr. Gosse, “Gray seems to have been 
really frightened lest they should marry him suddenly, against 
his will,” to Miss Speed, “and perhaps he almost wished they 
would.” 




i34 IRambles in autograph Hanb 


niece, Miss Speed, and a Mrs. Schaub to visit 
Gray at his mother’s home near by. As he 
was absent at the moment of their call they 
left a note for him which led to the somewhat 
mediocre poem called The Long Story. When 
Lady Cobham died in 1760 she left £20 
to Gray for a mourning ring and £30,000 
to Miss Speed. According to Sir Leslie 
Stephen, “some vague rumours, which how¬ 
ever Gray mentions with indifference, pointed 
to a match between the poet and the heir¬ 
ess”; but in January, 1761, when nearly 
forty, “the heiress” married a man ten years 
her junior, the Baron de la Peyri£re, a son 
of the Sardinian minister, and went to the 
family estate of Viry, on Lake Geneva, ulti¬ 
mately attaining the title of Comtesse de Viry. 
She died in 1783, twelve years after Gray’s 
death, and was said to have been “eminent 
for her wit and accomplishments.” 

These poems, which are in Gray’s unmistak¬ 
able handwriting, were not included in any 
collection published in his lifetime, nor in the 
Wakefield edition of 1786; but they appear in 
the edition of John Mitford. The Pickering 




fIDp ©wn Collection 


135 


reprint of Mitford asserts that the originals 
were given by the Countess to the Rev. Mr. 
Leman of Suffolk while he was on a visit at 
her castle in Savoy, and Mr. Gosse follows 
this statement, but I think that Walpole’s 
inscription is a better authority. Perhaps 
there were duplicate originals. 

The first of the poems was written at Miss 
Speed’s request, to an old air of Geminiani, 
the thought taken from the French. The 
version in the Mitford edition is printed 
from the copy which appeared in Walpole’s 
Letters to the Countess of Ailesbury. A 
different version is given in Park’s edition, 
and neither rendering corresponds exactly 
with the manuscript. The verses read as 
follows: 


Thyrsis when he left me, swore 
E’er the spring he would return. 

Ah! what means yon opening flower 
And the bird that decks the thorn? 
’Twas the lark that upward sprung, 
’Twas the nightingale that sung. 






136 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


2 . 

Idle notes, untimely green! 

Why such unavailing haste? 

Gentle gales and skies serene 
Prove not always winter past. 

Cease my doubts, my fears to move, 

Spare the honour of my Love. 

The Pickering copy varies from the original 
in six places: we have “when we parted” in 
the first line; “ere” for “e’er”—a correction; 
11 violet flower” instead of “opening flower”; 
“ this unavailing haste”; “western” not 
“gentle” gales; “speak” in place of “prove.” 
The Park copy is more accurate, having only 
three variations: “in” for “e’er,” “sky se¬ 
rene,” and the last two lines of the first verse 
are transposed. These are trifling things, but 
they lead us to think that editors are not 
always to be trusted. Mitford (or was it 
Walpole?) did not improve the poem. 

The other poem is given by Mitford exactly 
as it was written. In the edition printed by 
T. Bensley in 1800 it is headed: “The follow¬ 
ing lines, which have never yet appeared in 
any collection of Gray’s poems, deserve to be 





Manuscript poems by Thomas Gray, with annotation by Horace Walpole 






















































































fll>2 ©wn Collection 


137 


considered as a literary curiosity, since they 
are the only amatory verses written by our 
Pindaric bard.” This gives colour to the 
“vague rumours” of the tender feeling of the 
cold and bashful poet towards the future 
Countess of Viry. 

With beauty with pleasure surrounded to languish, 

To weep without knowing the cause of my anguish; 
To start from short slumbers, and wish for the morning, 
To close my dull eyes when I see it returning; 

Sighs sudden and frequent, looks ever dejected; 
Words that steal from my tongue, by no meaning 
connected, 

Ah! say, fellow swains how these symptoms befell me? 
They smile but reply not—sure Delia will tell me. 

The 1800 edition says “Delia can tell me.” 
If this was the best Gray could do in the 
amatory line, he was wise to make no more 
attempts, and we cannot wonder that Miss 
Speed hastened to the arms of her Baron from 
Savoy. 1 The “Pindaric bard” was mani¬ 
festly more at home in a churchyard than 
in the courts of Love; “sure” Delia could not 
have told him. Justice to Gray requires us 

r As Whitwell Elmo says of it, “It might have been written 
by an anchorite.” 




138 Gambles in autograph Xanb 


to emphasise the fact that neither of these 
rather feeble effusions was sent out into the 
world by his procurement or with his ap¬ 
proval. 1 

Charles Lloyd is remembered chiefly because 
he was the friend of Lamb, Coleridge, Words¬ 
worth, and Southey, and his early poems ap¬ 
peared, with Lamb’s, as a sort of postscript 
to the little book, dear to all Lamb-lovers, 
entitled Poems by S. T. Coleridge , Second 
Edition . He was indeed a minor poet of the 
so-called Lake School; but he had many fine 
qualities and De Quincey said of him that 11 he 
was a man never to be forgotten.” Charles 
Lamb and the Lloyds , by E. V. Lucas, is an 
entertaining book, like all those which come 
from the pen of that accomplished writer. 
My autograph letter of Lloyd’s throws light 
upon a little old-fashioned English romance. 
In 1799 Lloyd married Sophia, daughter of 
Samuel Pemberton of Birmingham. It was 
a runaway match. Dr. Garnett says in the 


1 As an instance of the increase in prices, it may be recalled 
that the manuscript of the Elegy was sold in 1847 for £100! 
At the same sale The Long Story brought £45 and the Odes £10. 













Charles Lamb 

From an engraving of the painting by Henry Meyer 

* 










/ 


* r '^' 




(P 


jtc+r/ ^tifye// +"4 jf ?'* / ^*'*’ 6 J^rv+rW 4t*' 

ty# /tft/ / & 6*- ^rrrt's s /A*# ^ £ <?/** A A*> 

'ijfnZ/• 4 'fuf/f*' m A**', hf£* P+t/eV ta, ■</? jh'*~'/C*n. d' 

ktf/e 6 £****■- aArivA /4?e*' *}-* A - j Aa AfaCs t ^ - . 

& v*~ ■*-■ AT* /?•»* ?'' 

AlffC / (* '^ r Pt***f**tA A ybusxsfr? /.. 

X / **#> sy 

/fr u A»?r<r/ 6 Jfyef. /%r £tj£s ~f/ 

d*AS rkrf 6ft** tS/Ust 6 tAiAteS" £ X+*n., fs //, 

A/& <*7*1 t+t ’ rAr* s/nS/f ■ /fc- y/ ' s.y ^ n/ / ' 

,V • Jv ^ ‘S ’1~y % *%?;' *"* <—'£. ■- : 

w ^*7" ^ ^ 

/zst/y // c**t£«U, *oS/ ^ *<c ^ ~ y y? 

'f*~~~ r *?**> I* AS ~f*f 

'^' / ■*"*', A /~**r f dS 

Ajytt't'^ m*e£ ^ac, - Aj/u,** - ' ^ 

/C —- • -i 


/J O im Ac* A 
GuATA 


x 


:/ / 

r 


y<*Y+/ryC/ 


/yu£, 


s/W /(/ 




?***]**f; /*/ yr &#ts A fir* JeyS S*+U*/ X/' 
ft/vW Actfefl 


A. L. S. of Charles Lamb to Robert Southey, November 7, 1804 













flD? ©von Collection 


139 


Dictionary of National Biography that “if 
De Quincey can be trusted, he eloped with 
her ‘by proxy,’ employing no less distin¬ 
guished a person than Southey to carry her 
off.” I do not believe it. De Quincey, sad 
to say, is seldom to be trusted; he had such a 
store of reminiscences of things which never 
happened. I am glad that Mr. Lucas does 
not believe it either. He says of the tale: 
“That, however, probably is not so. One 
cannot quite see Southey thus engaged.” I 
think my letter justifies this scepticism. It 
was written to Southey the day of the 
marriage: 


Friday mom. 


Dearest Southey— 

Sophia and I shall be married this mom at 10 
o’clock. Mr. P. returned and has behaved with all 
possible obstinacy. He will not see me and again 
threatens to disinherit his daughter. This step is 
therefore hastened to prevent all mischances. We 
shall set forward for Cumberland either on Sunday or 
Monday. I am very happy and feel many assurances 
of comfort. Kindest love to Mrs. Southey and Edith, 
and also to Tom if he be at home. 

Dear Southey, farewell. 

C. Lloyd Jr. 




ho ‘Fambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


This is hardly the sort of letter a man 
would write to one whom he was expecting to 
do his eloping for him. It is pleasant to 
know that, whether or not Mr. Pemberton 
disinherited Sophia, the marriage was a very 
happy one, clouded only by poor Lloyd’s fits 
of insanity, and even De Quincey, much given 
to saying disagreeable things about people he 
knew, testifies to his admiration and respect 
for brave Mrs. Lloyd, who, he thought, 
personally resembled Mrs. Jordan, the fas¬ 
cinating. 

Byron’s fame as a poet has been subjected 
to vicissitudes, and while one generation ex¬ 
alts him, another decries him unduly. The 
latter half of the nineteenth century was 
poetically dull, despite Tennyson, Browning, 
and Swinburne, and it treated Byron quite 
contemptuously, but he is coming into his own 
again; and certainly his autographs have 
always been much in demand. One of mine 
is a manuscript containing six stanzas of 
“Oscar of Alva,” a poem included in Hours of 
Idleness. They are written on both sides of 
a small quarto sheet, and there are many 





7 












C>y^ ^T < ^ 

_/7 /^U £ /&?? a^yix^-J ^L, 


s 


72 * rz ?i 




7 


& a C c /*£" _ 


As C 

{Tx^M 9 ^ l-X^e) S&^l' 


,7 


£> /l >^>Z ^ 


syt x 

s^c ,&'l& sA ^ ^U^W 






a.r*-t^i~ 717Csu.«^t~> ' - — 

~Y^~ t> j */ y?<^r 2 ^ 


>/z / ^ 




p a ^ 




'7 


C' A <^v >7 CC / 


n. 


First page of A. L. S. of Charles Lloyd to Robert Southey, undated 













^ a, t-C. 

^-X. O^^-Z^O O'*-/ 

^h °y - ' ••' "' 

4 '**■ 

a^x. 




y <y 
?£ Y^t^f 


£•<— - -- 






Last page of A. L. S. of Charles Lloyd to Robert Southey, undated 












George Gordon, Lord Byron 

From a mezzotint 












fIDp ©wn Collection 


141 


erasures and corrections, whole lines being 
roughly scored through and rewritten. It is 
a “shocking bad hand” but by no means 
illegible. The verses, numbered from 29 to 
34 inclusive, appear in print as follows: 


29. 

“Oh, search, ye chiefs! oh, search around! 

Allan, with these, through Alva fly; 

Till Oscar, till my son is found, 

Haste, haste, nor dare attempt reply.” 

30 . 

All is confusion—through the vale, 

The name of Oscar hoarsely rings, 

It rises on the murm’ring gale, 

Till night expands her dusky wings. 

3i- 

It breaks the stillness of the night, 

But echoes through her shades in vain; 
It sounds through morning’s misty light, 
But Oscar comes not o’er the plain. 


32 . 

Three days, three sleepless nights, the chief 
For Oscar search’d each mountain cave; 
Then hope is lost; in boundless grief, 

His locks in grey-tom ringlets wave. 



142 'Rambles in Hutograpb %anb 


33 - 

“Oscar! my son!—thou God of Heav’n, 
Restore the prop of sinking age! 

Or, if that hope no more is given, 

Yield his assassin to my rage. 


34 - 

“Yes, on some desert rocky shore 
My Oscar’s whiten’d bones must lie; 

Then grant, thou God! I ask no more, 

With him his frantic Sire may die!” 

This follows the manuscript, except in 
punctuation; the punctuation of poets is most 
uncertain. In the last line, Byron wrote 
“lie” and not “die,” and the correction 
improves the rhyme but not the sense; 
whether the change was made by the printer 
or by the author I have no means of deciding. 
The manuscript is accompanied by a letter 
from John Murray in which he says: “It is a 
genuine autograph and might fetch from 2 
to 3 guineas at an Auction at Sotheby’s.” 
The year of Murray’s letter is not given; it 
evidently proceeded from John Murray the 
younger, who died in 1892. His estimate of 
price seems low, when we consider that in 





Portion of original MS. of “Oscar of Alva,” by George Gordon, Lord Byron 

























flD\> ©vxm Collection 


143 


1909, at a New York sale, a manuscript of a 
Byron poem of sixteen lines—“I saw thee 
weep”—brought two hundred dollars. True 
to my record, I wholly forget what I paid for 
mine. 

Byron's mother, that much abused lady, 
was not without pride in her son’s work, and 
she wrote to Mr. James Cawthom, bookseller, 
of No. 24 Cockspur Street, London, a letter as 
follows: 


Newstead Abbey near Nottingham. 

5th Feby. (1810). 

Sir : I wrote to you the 24th or 25th of last month 
and am surprised that I have received no answer. 
The purport of my letter was to know whether my 
son Lord Byron’s work “English Bards and Scotch 
Reviewers ” was in the second or third edition, and to 
desire you to inform me of all the Reviews, Magazines 
&c. &c. &c. where it was mentioned, whether abused 
or praised no matter, I wish to peruse them, for what 
months they are mentioned in. The only two I have 
read is the critiques in the Gentlemans Magazine 
and the Anti-Jacobin for April last. Send an imme¬ 
diate answer. 

She was evidently in a hurry as she drew 
near the close, for her style becomes confused- 
It may be true that when a school-fellow said 




144 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


to Byron, “Your mother is a fool/' he an¬ 
swered, “I know it”; but he was wrong. She 
may have been capricious and passionate, 
but she was no fool. 

There is a peculiar pleasure in roving among 
the poet-portfolios, for although they are 
filled with much that is of no great interest 
other than the merely autographic, we dis¬ 
cover here and there the little personal touches 
which bring the writer before us—as when we 
read what the grave Professor Beattie wrote 
from Aberdeen in May, 1774, saying bis 
stately eighteenth-century fashion: 

Dr. Johnson was here in autumn last, but I could 
not attend him, being then detained in England by 
business. I am happy to hear that the cold and 
hunger and other calamities which he must of neces¬ 
sity have encountered in his tour have not impaired 
his health, and that he seriously intends to oblige the 
world by publishing an account of his travels. The 
remarks of such a genius on such a country must 
have in them something very original and extra¬ 
ordinary. 

A tour in Scotland and to the Hebrides 
seems to have been looked upon very much as 
an expedition to the North Pole is now re- 



■■ 


'V» 


-v .. . 





Thomas Hood 









/ 




^L 


/Cy 



>Ct^ 

J> 

Z» >~7 

- 

Jk*TIs*- 


C-^»N 

% 

- ^ A' ^ 

C^/ 

Asy^j 

tl aiyJyJ 

A 

kr~ 

/{^J^V-<~S^y£ -P- ^'1*y / Z 



S&- ^7 C ' 


V 


,/x^ 


^ V'^4 br-xr'^ 

c +^ x ^ r ' t ^'^0 
? 

A<r,< S? SZ*- 

T>~<s~yy ^ f~*~ ^ 

*>/ 


J~V^<i-' s 


/ ' / * ' 

f^j_Jyls7 *y? *** ^ 

//- * 


~sy+—> 




^ • 5 


- ^ ^ 
*y/ //«- *• c 

//trhJ^-4%1 _ 

U^ l' ^ 


2 


/. 


/ 


A_ —^ 


C/l^H-- 


■sC. 


^y/l, - 


A 

1^1 


/^r 

jL^irAy 

J ~ 



First page of A. L. S. (4 pages) of Thomas Hood to F. 0. Ward, undated 











fll>p ©\*m Collection 


145 


garded. Then we find something in another 
vein, as when Edward Lear writes to his 
friend Miss Perry, a propos of some proposed 
lodgings: “I know that they have, or had, a 
good French cook; only I also know that she 
fell and broke her collar bone she did, though 
that may not have interfered culinarily”; and 
again, “ My Tennyson illustrations don’t pro¬ 
gress—Lithography and autotype &c &c. all 
seem to fail,—but I never give anything up 
while there is hope, as the tadpole said when 
his tail fell off.” Frederick Locker-Lampson 
writes to Miss Collins, to whom he had given 
a pair of earrings: “I am very glad you like 
the earrings. How is it that, your father 
being a poet, you never had your ears 
bored?” 

From a number of Hood’s letters I select 
one written as he was approaching the end of 
his sad life, for it shows him with a little jest 
at the end of his pen, struggling under the 
burdens of ill-health and the newly founded 
Hood's Magazine which Mr. F. O. Ward, his 
sub-editor, was faithfully conducting under 
the supervision of his dying chief. 


10 



146 IRambles in Butograpb Xanb 


My dear Ward:— 

I continue better and the wind has changed and I 
have had my window open. The sycamore is no 
longer emetical. What a day for Ascot!—without 
any Running Rain! 

You have n’t sent the Fraser. I will look over 
Wolesby’s list more carefully in the morning. Most 
of them it appears are very stale—e.g. Life of Louis 
Phillippe—a poor book. I have had it these 9 months. 
Slick the attachd is old too. Howitt’s German book 
I should like to do myself. Twiss Life of Eldon 
ought to be a good book, but it is not ready I suspect. 
I hope Wolesby is not strong Tory. Our actresses I 
dare say will be sent by Smith & Elder when ready. 

I have done three cuts on the wood today and shall 
send them per boy tomorrow to the wood cutter. 
Perhaps with some more. 

It is funny Wolesby talking of “novelties” with 
such a list of stale books. Please not to write to 
Broderip—pro tern. 

If Cooper’s Ashore and Afloat is new it might do. 
But I do not see why we should turn Retrospective Re¬ 
viewers and go back to old wares. My notion is reviews 
of novelties, with good extracts—for our readers before 
they can generally get the books thro circulating li¬ 
braries. I will send George to-morrow for the Fraser. 

Dr. Toulmin’s verses are weak & come to “a bad 
end.” They certainly will not do. The Mag. has a 
poetical reputation we must not undermine. A little 
and good. I am certain that readers are more dis¬ 
gusted by indifferent poetry than by bad prose. 

Yours affectionately, 

T. Hood 


F. 0 . Ward Esq. 









Robert Southey 

From an engraving by E. Finden after the painting by T. Phillips, R. A. 































































































J\ b'U* Oiurt H rJT* * * , 

, -< tu/ftir (dtit-KfcS li* , 

fa t(& <»# *'Cr<skfay %i 

tu, lu frTi* & (/ It Ir uu« ft if auiJ', 

/) «\ ( a lut *"i c/ f 1st If tt-Cyx&f 

luk o *) 

d( & ^ <»*£. 

frifa if fa r *rtfa * (&% Ufa ( 
itArvufa % +*& * rat. 

Cj 2 fiu. hf n< ‘fart k- jfa . 

Cu !h iltruW fu<Jtr»?> £■&■ 


YUh. cU uc; 'tAr ; 4 %■*** ca.^ i 

Hu. lujfcth i*n <*■ '•£*■! eo< - 
A/y (h '/ ^ ft*-" ^ • 


Page of original MS. of “ The Curse of Kehama,” by Robert Southey 








©\x>n Collection 


147 


Southey may not have been a great poet, 
but he was in every good sense “a literary 
man,” and he was so fond of his books! So 
neat and legible was his chirography that it is 
a delight to me to look over the manuscript 
of The Curse of Kehama , whose introductory 
lines, 


Midnight, and yet no eye 

Thro’ all the Imperial City clos’d in sleep, 

were so amusingly parodied in the lines of 
The Rejected Addresses beginning, 

Midnight, and not a nose 

From Tower Hill to Piccadilly snored. 

It was said of his handwriting that “it is not 
modern English writing but a modernisation 
of old English writing.” He is dear to us less 
for the epics of which he was so proud, than 
for the immortal Tale of the Three Bears and 
the story, so familiar in our childhood, which, 
when old Kaspar’s work was done, the vener¬ 
able gentleman related to little Peterkin and 
Wilhelmine, about the “famous victory.” 
There is truth even at this day in this letter 




148 Gambles in autograph Xanb 


which he wrote to Mr. William Webb, dated at 
Keswick on November 8, 1824: 


The usual course thro which an author’s manuscript 
passes is this [says Southey]: if it be of a nature that 
the bookseller thinks worth a moment’s consideration, 
he requests some other author of whose judgment he 
happens to think well to look at it (sometimes the 
most incompetent person in the world) and acts upon 
his opinion. The recommendation of one who is a 
friend of the writer goes for nothing. If you have 
any friend in London to whom you can entrust this 
sort of commission, let him take the manuscript to 
Murray, or any other respectable publisher, & ask as 
speedy an answer as may be convenient. If you have 
not, & the manuscript is in your own writing, a more 
summary way may be to have the first sheet printed 
in Dublin—for a sheet will be as sufficient a sample 
as a volume. The idlest person to whom it may be 
referred will glance over it,—whereas a manuscript 
if not very legibly written is always regarded with 
some degree of dismay. You can then enclose your 
sample in a frank to the publisher-elect, who may then 
very likely form his own opinion—& is in good manners 
bound to deliver it without delay. The time and 
trouble which this method will save, I should think 
worth the cost. If the bookseller declines the under¬ 
taking, you can try others. ... I like a book in 
which the writer shows himself to be what he is, & is 
not ashamed of a little honest egotism. Do not expect 
too much from it. Public opinion is as little to be 
relied on in such things as the wind and weather in 





Matthew Prior 



















































































































4 ^— . 


r A/: '44- 




sA'S* f''*^ 4~' " '/ 
a :> ^ 4 - r ^ '<'/' 

yy ^ s^yy**/ r* 

^'/^A gtr^st^ A J^rr-^, AsZ <A LAA 

t^rzXiJ y'~ 9 ’ 7 *2- ^ AZ 

.~a) S*S S^‘-7Cr7&* f f^’ --,*.P- -^JA 

?y£' A <rz^ -*aS s** J ***^ *** <y*^ srt^sZL 

f'sr+C'4&*£- ^ 

yy^y^ zz / y^sr. 62 *. 

^j? y yy*- ^ ^ 

^ y/^y ^ ^ ^ ^ x'trr'ts ^y^y -y? 

Sy^r ss y^ y^y^ jfy~ y^ y ^<. ^ 

no. 


ZSX 




se-S.- 

/ 


\r 

// rS/'?<~^ ^ y r^ _ 4 ^ ^~‘ 

.'/ ^-/ **^^'Ln. y^■ 

, /y ■; y^yc^yy^-*? ^ <*t- 
»~*s yy*~r, ~~l-S"^ ? 

' - s J y *z>z y 

■&/ t 4 s«v^ z^tciAL) 


*A ~ 

;. ty 





yy 


First page of A. L. S. (3 pages) of Matthew Prior, June 17, 1708 













flD\> ©wn Collection 149 


this uncertain climate. And no author who knows 
what the public is, and by what mere caprice it is 
determined to the right or left, will either be elated 
by success or dispirited by failure. . . . My little 
boy is in the honey-moon of puerile happiness, having 
just put on that fashion of apparel which he must 
wear thro life. 

Straying back to the days of Queen Anne, 
we catch a glimpse of the time in a letter of 
Matthew Prior, whose poetic effusions were, 
as he himself declared, “the product of his 
leisure hours,” and who was commonly busy 
with politics and diplomacy; of whom, at his 
death, an admirer wrote these touching lines: 

Horace and He were call’d in haste 
From this vile Earth to Heaven; 

The cruel year not fully pass’d 
^Etatis, fifty seven. 

This letter came from the collection of Daw¬ 
son Turner, and was addressed to Sir Thomas 
Hanmer. Prior’s letter is easier to read than 
is most of his poetry. 

Dear sir: *Twas ridiculous that since your 
leaving London I should have contented myself w th 
asking Mr. Coleman how you do without writing to 
you; but to let a letter from you go a week unan- 




iso IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


swered is downright impudence; the Devil take me if 
I am not ashamed of it. Confiteor, est mea culpa, 
mea maxima culpa. Rabelais gives you a whole 
chapter of the same stile, when Panurge in the tempest 
at once damns himself and prays: and now what to 
write is the question. My Ld Griffen is reprieved for 
a fortnight; her Maj is better, and designs for Winsor 
next week. The Scotch Prisoners are most of them 
bayled and gon home again—and all public matters 
are much in that indifferent situation in w ch you left 
them. Lady Sandwich and Lady Fitzharding are 
gone out of town. Lord and Lady Jersey go next 
week. Your tutor Aldrich leaves us to-morrow. 
After these matters are adjusted, I think nobody will 
be left here, but myself and my fellow builder the 
Duke of Bucks: there is nothing printed worth my 
sending you except it be an acc‘ of our American Colo¬ 
nies by Oldmixon, w ch if you please to have, you will 
lay your commands upon me. I hope you are all 
well, from my Lady Dutchesse to M rs Susan. I must 
charge you with my particular respects to M rs Ramsey 
and she ought to take this as an extraordinary mark 
of my favour at this time, for I am really so splenitic, 
that I think I should hardly have done more for my 
own nutt brown Betty. Vive & vale. 

Yours ever, 
Mat: Prior 

West' June 17th, 1708. 


Returning from Anne to Victoria, here is a 
letter of Christina Rossetti to Bayard Taylor, 
in that beautiful, almost copper-plate hand- 





I 












* 






Alfred, Lord Tennyson 







fU*j\ f\s U 

Xo>j t^f^h L^4 j*+//£ 

4>Vvw<^ t->v A- t^U y^t^vi/W 

OV* Kf^t, ^yry.^ 

f* tK, ^c -4w*u J^yU-j L<^ 

fl'X. </^5 a^u <-*-* £► 

y^V^K Xy<yC-J 0 i tJ £iS^ ‘ V 

r /-V 

^ j - ^ /*~ /^- ik-. <F f- 

**v^ Jdk*(^sL ^~y-y~\< t— 'J^L-** 

/ 

CsSf* '^^f r y^Jl 


First page of A. L. S. (3 pages) of Alfred, Lord Tennyson, to Bayard Taylor, March 

19, 1866 






















































































































































































































































































































fll>£ ©wrt Collection 


151 


writing of hers, which has nevertheless an 
individuality which copper-plate script does 
not possess; a handwriting resembling in some 
respects that of Mr. William Allen Butler. 
I am not certain what book of Taylor’s elicited 
the letter, but I think it must have been The 
Picture of St. John , which was published in 
October, 1866. 


166 Albany St. London— 

N. W. England— 

22d, 1867- 

Dear SIR— 

I hope I have not seemed dilatory in acknowledging 
the gift of your book, which only reached my hands 
yesterday evening, although the autograph which 
enriches it bears the date of last year. Pray now 
accept my best thanks. As yet I have read little 
more than the introduction; this has interested me, 
the more so as your experiment in versification appears 
to me a very happy one: may I venture to add my 
satisfaction at your having decided against the 
occasional Alexandrine. 

Pray allow me to remain 

Very truly yours, 

Christina G. Rossetti 

Tennyson’s letter to Bayard Taylor must 
refer to some other book than the one men¬ 
tioned by Miss Rossetti, as it was sent before 




152 IRamWes in autograph lanh 


The Picture of St. John was published. The 
Laureate manifestly felt hospitably disposed 
towards at least one American. 

Upper Gore Lodge. 

Kennington Gore. 
March 19, 1866. 

My dear sir : 

Your new book has just arrived in a hamper of 
provisions sent on here from Farringford, for we have 
been staying here for some weeks in a house formerly, 
I believe, belonging to Count D’Orsay and now to 
Lady Franklin, and we get for the most part supplied 
from the farm at home. Many thanks for your book 
which will I have no doubt increase your reputation, 
and for your kindly letter. I am sorry that I was 
not at home to welcome your friend Mr. Norwood. 
If you intend to honour me with another visit perhaps 
it will be as well to send me notice a week or so before 
you come, that I may not miss you. We are generally 
away on the Continent during July and September. 

Believe me, my dear sir, 

Yours very truly, 

A. Tennyson 

Tennyson’s interest in his “ hamper of pro¬ 
visions” and the supplies from the farm is 
about as unpoetic as the contents of my Shelley 
letter, which does not quite breathe the spirit 
of Adonais or the Ode to the Skylark . It is 
addressed to “ Messrs Hayward, Esq. Solicitor, 



fID? ©wn Collection 


153 


Tookes Court, Chancery Lane, London,” 
with the “Messrs” crossed out. 


Marlow, April 27, 1817. 


Dear Sir: 

Be so good as to pay the debt of Mrs. Peacock; I 
enclose a check for that purpose. I need not say 
that I should be extremely glad if any accommoda¬ 
tion short of the actual amount would be accepted. 

Your very obliged servt— 
Percy B. Shelley. 


No reason is assigned why the creditor 
should not receive the “actual amount’’ due, 
but perhaps that is the true poetic view of the 
subject of debt-paying, when the poet is the 
debtor. 

I find that Mrs. Fields’s specimen of Shelley 
—which she says is “at first sight not at all 
characteristic”—is very much like mine. I 
quote it from A Shelf of Old Books. 

Dear Sir, Enclosed is a check for (within a few 
shillings) the amount of your bill. Can’t you make 
the Booksellers subscribe more of the Poem? 

Your most obedient serv. 

Percy Bysshe Shelley 

Jan. 16,1818. 

I think it is highly characteristic. Mani- 




i54 IRamblea in Butograpb Xanb 


festly he was afflicted with a mania for 
“ rebates.” 

Bryan Waller Procter’s letters are always 
pleasant and graceful. I quote one of them, 
for it is about autographs, and it shows a 
commendable sympathy with collectors. He 
writes to a friend: 


Wednesday, 25 Bedford Square. 

My conscience (a tender thing) has been reproach¬ 
ing me any time this month past touching some auto¬ 
graphs which I promised you. You yourself (having 
promised on the thought of my promise) are probably 
in a similar dilemma of conscience,—and are medi¬ 
tating perhaps divers unsatisfactory excuses towards 
. . . who, if I recollect right, is to be the depositary 
of these same invaluable autographs. But comfort 
yourself. I have enclosed them, as rich a catalogue 
of nothings as the apothecary’s shop (in Romeo and 
Juliet) produced. Such as they are, however, they 
are all that I can at present lay hands on. If in the 
course of a subsequent search I should alight upon the 
hieroglyphics of any other poet or proser who bids 
fair to be immortal for the next 12 or 15 months, I 
will make you pay double its value by sending it to 
you by the two penny post. 

In another letter written on Christmas day, 
1866,. when he was in his eightieth year, he 
says: 




3 2 ,W KTMOOT* STIIET, 
F08TLAHD HACM. 




2 f~ A 



0 


lui~ /- t~~ / 

2^*C^ a-c </*- ^ - V- 

*.• a/^/ [>~zb/>****, 
*/! ^ r; 

fa h/ ^ 

„ ■ / /^w A 

7L, ^ ^ M. A 

/ /—77- / /Co- 7 - **" 

^^ *-* - '~* ~ * *'\ 
HU , . A * 



First page of A. L. S. (3 pages) of Bryan Waller Proctor, December 25, 1866 



























































fB>\> ©wn Collection 


155 


I have called Lamb and Hazlitt “Unitarians .” 1 
They were so, according to their own professions and 
these I accept as truth. I am not able to penetrate 
deeper and cross-examine them. As to Leigh Hunt, 
I confess that he is a problem. I knew him for forty 
years. He was continually tampering (coquetting) 
with matters in religion and morals that we are accus¬ 
tomed to consider as true and beyond question; and 
I have known him pushed to the verge of ill-temper 
(yet he was a good tempered man) by requests to 
explain what he meant by “Nature” and similar 
vague phrases which he was accustomed to resort to. 
Hazlitt used to say “Damn it, its like a rash that 
comes out every year in him. Why does n’t he write 
a book and get rid of it?” I suppose that poor Hunt 
knows all the truth now—all that so few understand. 
He is beyond the ultima linea rerum. ... As to 
my own small matters, I am quite content that they 
should crumble away and be forgotten. Literature 
was never my profession and no one can do much 
unless he strives and gives his whole soul to it. I am 
glad that you like (or do I mistake?) my memoir of 
dear Charles Lamb. 


But I fear I long ago reached the tiresome 
stage in the matter of poets’ letters. Just 
one more—for it refers to a Washington letter, 
which I have already mentioned, and also to a 
Milton document. It is from Samuel Rogers. 


1 1 think it is “ Unitarians ”; the word is not very legible. 




156 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


April 12, 1841. 

My dear sir :— 

Many, many thanks for your kind letter and for 
the precious relick which [you] inclosed in it. I have 
already another no less precious, for which I am in¬ 
debted to Mr. Hamilton, a letter to his father from 
General Washington and on a most interesting sub¬ 
ject, his acceptance of the Presidency. I have placed 
them side by side. I touch them with all reverence, 
and may they go down together inspiring the senti¬ 
ments they breathe from generation to generation! 

You ask me concerning Milton’s assignment. I 
can only say that its authenticity has never been 
questioned. The handwriting is the same as in all 
his other deeds. It has always been referred to as an 
historical document, and was acquired by Sir Thomas 
Lawrence together with an assignment of Dryden 
witnessed by Congreve (a writing also which I be¬ 
lieve you saw in my possession) from the executors 
of Tonson, the bookseller. The handwriting of a 
blind man being called forth only on important occa¬ 
sions is not so likely to degenerate as another’s would 
do. 

When will you come and see me again? Pray, pray 
come soon as I may not be to be [sic] found here. 

Sincerely yours, 
Saml Rogers 

St. James’s Place. 

London. 

You may remember that the signature only is 
written by Milton. The deed is by a lawyer and it 
is witnessed by John Fisher and by Benjamin Green, 
servants to Mr. Milton. 





Samuel Rogers 

Prom an engraving by W. Finden after the painting by Sir Thomas 
Lawrence 






































































/ 























i f'flSl 72; , 


/%4-J - 


/, 


//- 




/" 


Z'/.»». 


<r‘‘ #• “» Z * #-« < ■/* •] ^ 

' y 


y / ' y y 

/<«►-/ *•«-*» Ak « r^*-. «/ 


7 ' -- ‘7 y/ ^~" ^ 

S' 

^ r| * <** */•* y- «* ^ /r/ *” - y ^<» —*3^* # *» 

/* »i^-/Z-o- --/XI* "»<r r *« •* •<■ > 

,: y /-y /., sfr*r f ~ if*sc.*. /- ff 'f- 

r.^jT^r , JU, -/ - 

^:..._ / /^.yi ./^ — /- - 77 '“' 7 //r ' 






>y 

./ 


7 


...yr ^*• 7 *- ""*7 /^~7 J~ 

i.y 


*> »y o «*"-m /tj - Z Z •« v - 7 




>/, y,,, 7"' 


/ 


«t.y*- 4 


/f ** £- 

/ 


«- ^ ^ -v '7rt «**. ^ ^« 




y k*^* 


^ «x- 


// 


/»'« *■ 


, 7 , .{-< //•'-* fTx-^y f <1 


«T ' * l 


First page of A. L. S. (2 pages) of Samuel Rogers, April 12, 1841 












fH>? ©wn Collection 


157 


Rogers lived until December, 1855, fourteen 
years after this letter was written. The 
Milton document was the original articles 
of agreement between Milton and his printer 
for the sale of the copyright of Paradise Lost. 
Rogers obtained it in 1831, and in 1852 he 
gave it to the British Museum. Facsimiles 
of the beginning and ending are to be found in 
Dr. Scott’s book. This important document 
was disposed of at the sale of Sir Thomas 
Lawrence’s effects for $315. Rogers paid 
$525 for it. 




CHAPTER IX 


DIARIES 


Diaries—Evelyn and Pepys—Letter of Evelyn—Richard Steele 
to Sir Thomas Hanmer—Samuel Johnson—Edmund Burke 
to Fanny Burney—Lord Monboddo—Lord Clive—Earl 
of Shelburne—Lord Chatham—An Autograph Beggar— 
John Ruskin—J. S. Mill—Charles Dickens—Richard Cobden 


The Diary of John Evelyn possesses histori¬ 
cal interest but the Diary of Samuel Pepys will 
always be more charming, because Pepys 
was the more human of the two men and he 
reveals himself with absolute freedom; more¬ 
over there is a flavour of naughtiness about 
the disclosures which always tends to the 
enjoyment of the reader although he might not 
always confess it. De Quincey had but a 
poor opinion of Evelyn, and said: “The mind 
of a man is very generally seen in the use he 
makes of a journal; Evelyn is very meagre and 
bad.” We are not all of that opinion, and 
158 



John Evelyn 

From the engraving by W. H. Worthington after the painting by 

Walker 







Diaries 


159 


Evelyn’s Diary, although not so lively as the 
record kept for a few years by his rival diarist, 
is valuable as the story of the life of a scholarly 
man in the latter part of the seventeenth 
century. The friendship of the two diarists 
continued until the death of Pepys in 1703, 
and his older contemporary survived him 
only three years. Pepys seems to have under¬ 
stood Evelyn and his vanity fairly well, but 
Evelyn did not fully understand Pepys, whose 
self-disclosures were generally confined to the 
pages of his journal. It is pleasant to con¬ 
template a letter which is intimately associated 
with both of them,—one which Evelyn ad¬ 
dressed “For Sami. Pepys Esq. at Mr. Hewer’s 
house at Clappham, Surry,” and which bears 
the endorsement inPepys’shandwriting: “Mr. 
Evelyn to S. P. A Letter of Regret after my 
sickness, with a Request of Mr. Arch-Deacon 
Nicholson’s touching y e use of some of my 
Scotch manuscripts.” 


Dover Street, 10 May, 1700. 

Sr— 

I do most heartily congratulate y e Improvement of 
your health, since your change of aire; which accept- 





i6o iRambles in autograph Xanb 


able newes your Servant brought this morning, and 
returned to you with our prayers and wishes for the 
happy progress and full restitution of it. In the 
mean time I take this opportunity of acquainting 
you that a worthy correspondent of mine (I am sure 
not unknown to you, Mr. Nicolson, Arch-Deacon of 
Carlisle) being it seems about a work in which he has 
occasion to mention some Affairs relating to the Scotts; 
and hearing from me that you were Indispos’d, writes 
this to me— 

“ I am troubled to heare of Mr. Pepy’s Indisposition; 
I heartily wish his recovery and the continuance of a 
restored health. When I was an attendant on Mr. 
Sec. Williamson about 20 years ago, I often waited 
on him at his house in Westminster. But I was then 
(as I still am) too inconsiderable to be remembered 
by him. Besides an account of the author (if known) 
of his Ms. Life of Mary Q. of Scotts; I very much 
desire to know, whether there be any valuable matters 
relating to the History of Scotland amongst Sr R. 
Maitland’s collections of Scottish poems? I observe 
that in the same volume with Balfour’s Practique 
(or Reports, as we call ’em) he has a manuscript of 
the old Sea Laws of Scotland; I would beg to be 
Informed whether this last Treatise be the same with 
the Leges posterem (?) which (tho’ quoted by Sr Jo. 
Skene, under that Latine title) is written in the Scotish 
Language, and is onely a List of the Customes of 
Goods Imported and Exported: If I may (through 
your kind intercession) have the favour of transcrib¬ 
ing anything to my purpose out of his Library; I have 
a young kindsman (a clarke to Mr. Musgrave of this 
Parish) who will waite on him to that purpose. ” 




: \ 


L--0 o / t? S^r-e-cS- lo : 7 t 


r<*f 


y* 



*M \y 
■>•>0 

■ « 


I tW. 


*7 , . .. ’ 

. ^ Clergy tre^O^. £*/* Pt~ tor* *tik 

fVc^ 4 * **-*L fuet tlffjp, „ t *Ifcuv CJ*-~ n i&- J - *£ <*• HT ■ US *■-*'t°K. c< < < <pkt&&. J 

HCUA*/ y «>*-(. »• jJ"* 2r **«»♦ 2> At +**" 2*1 CfT^ * ‘ *<■‘7 , 0.^1$ Ayg 

■*** * ^ ^ ‘ r ^* J rY *-** «<- fly'itbtjr ^oi A*<j.y (y 

^ * ** -* *'-•* 1 ^—- 4-^’- -nV-Cc< »1»> /». ■ntJ'J t <^J~ J 

<< crsrcJly (.o' 

#t4" /o V+IA. ' Al* «* ^4* * 

xAt^cAS^ C-KCO* of &<>■>'CJ& ) AA* t<r c£* " , ‘ JJ,r . U f CjC '*'*'* 

* vh> ^x c J<^ ™ c j,/ 4 «;** 

1 £/<-7»J «y {■**' VM '-»,c^ ?4*t/ i*s*r? fl-^A'.Jft "lx t 

*C f ^1 '* K ^.' /-) / . / /\<tv /7 / 

ioL*£ A> 'dUt«**ry, rc S 4JU C* ^v«e^ V 

x p^<*u c ^£u >«/«*+ AVt cT'hA^^-y ^'2*, 2 1 

'*s tAs 


' c^L /Cp- A-« j 

^jr^z?7 ? tr^r 

lt # 


13 f uj*S‘ 

<<&& & 


Q *>JJ-*. 

,f<>Lf p^rf-if K >n\ ^ ° $■*''• 


€_o n.i 


L 


f'i)-p (-*r ^*2» 

t> l £4iyjLS.Sj/i •jp'fh «ry H‘ -v<*v u c *« - 4 

X^»y>, ixrt^NU* ^{AL^c 4 (V *{*<*£& '**&&£?/* 


*1 
H \ 



c.M a < (-At* *^J-f { -s fa client/ 

K > i 

. ^ ^ __ _ X < /i Of 

^ i^y y C *~r <*•*-*-{ 

' ‘ L 4 f_ 

v> i~le*cL -> 

Kf'-f *4- 'HV 'V 

il 


O M^e ty, *{j‘tl~*/- 44 L*~( 2 / 4 rt l 0 i*\*/ &/- £O “ p**y\f* O *A-H ^ t 

0/ *+s ^ '&'crr< ) A J>C^K fc**A**jr - 

.. f £> tv ™Y J> cc^tA*lu <r> 



c^ r rru'yjr r "r cr ^ ^T+-^ ,x ^ ^ y ^ J T 

r/&xi* *#- 

in4J~ l ; - 

.»« *'y'» ' /rj *“ £'Q)* Aey vLe-ri^,. <at»i «£ Ci - 

hj~zZi~ fi —a 4 , 

/) ct^K rx./^> Avit&'sk) * A-uA-+A* 'mtMfr Pp-yujCL± 4c'c/^A, 

S^<*< { *7,y *'%***-£ 9 n *„ * ■ 

,r^wMS>lir** J r ) :^ty < 7* ?r 
ji* /oAft ^.-^S5>* a, 

***■, . £ _ 1 /- * /' 'U \ i-A-ef 


OK. 

K ^ 


^ / ' 


/■ 


a.k J u*e_'As* *^‘d ' 

jl, 0 /cf « * /*o A/-^ >vi *//■ l tee# A 


tf»y 


pti 4'* 4/ 

*■**- >*v<f 4» ITt< 


K^ c H. 4 /tt ^ ->n »jt 
^c«ro*o*.Ao )( k’( 

A^j^/jfL ? jA. ' t »» *-*-» 


<v, Ul? >Ho i hf** <K^cAt 
^ X< >vCi22^ ^f<Jk? lXo< 't/L. 



A. L. S. of John Evelyn to Samuel Pepys, May io, 1700 













Diaries 


161 


This Sr., is Mr. A. D.’s Request, and which indeede 
I should have communicated to you, when I was lately 
to kiss your hands: But so was I transported with 
seeing you in so hopefull and faire a way of Recovery, 
as it quite put this, and all other things else out of 
my thoughts. 

I am now (God willing) about the middle of next 
Week, for a Summer residence at Wot ton; where I 
have enough to do with a decayed and ruinous 
dwelling; But where yet my Friends (or at least 
their Letters), will find me; And if I suspend my 
answer to Mr. Nicolson ’til you are at perfect leasure 
to enable me what to write (without giving you the 
least disturbance) I am sure he will be highly satisfyed. 

As I begun, so let me conclude with the most ear¬ 
nest prayer for your Health and hapyness. 

Sr, Your most faithfull humble servant, 

Evelyn 

My wife presents her most humble service to you 
and we both kiss Mrs. Skiner’s hands. 

When Richard Steele was a member of 
Parliament, in the time of Queen Anne, he 
produced, with the aid of Addison and others, 
a pamphlet called The Crisis , in which he 
dealt with the political questions of the day, 
notably with the matter of the Hanoverian 
succession, in such manner as to draw upon 
himself the wrath of all the Tories. Early 
in 1714 a motion was made to expel him from 




1 62 IRambles in autograph lanb 


his seat, on account of the alleged seditious 
nature of his writings; this was carried on 
the night of March 18, 1714. The next day 
he wrote to Sir Thomas Hanmer, the Speaker 
of the House, his friend whom he had sup¬ 
ported for the Speakership in the preceding 
February, suggesting a certain line of conduct 
in reference to his misfortune. The letter is 
given in full in Aitkin’s Life of Steele , ii., 
20-21. Sir Thomas replied on March 20th, 
pointing out the inadvisability of following the 
suggestions and giving Steele some judicious 
counsel. Steele’s answer, dated on March 
21st, is now in my hands and is as follows: 


Bloomsbury Square. 

March 21, 1714. 

Honoured Sir: 

I hope you will have the goodnesse to forgive the 
method I tooke towards coming at another examina¬ 
tion of my writings. 

Before I had the Honour of receiving yours I had 
written to Mr. Wortley that your Hesitation in the 
matter had determined me that I had taken a wrong 
way. 

I give you my most humble thanks for condescend¬ 
ing with your usuall clearnesse and perspicuity to 
explain to me my errour. 





Richard Steele 

From the engraving by G. Vertue after the painting by I. Thornhill 














































/V- 


A (^*-ir7rL*s^zi^yy n 

faascA 2 -/ 


/~T/f 


^Jffouy/c A y^^y-e /AsA* A?A/r 

t <r/HMA. f a/ ojl 7$(A"- escAahA*-*Aj>i c y/* l 7 ~~ 

J. ^ 

yi+f'* / 

P Ai/rx, /Ay> sA- r/' ^ - 

ce.Uy ^/> 2 > fuY2 An, ■&'/>■*’ l^CrAZj, 

^ #*- M*'A~r sr £i ^ 4 -- 

Jyftu. /*/~ ~ At?. 

r<, ^.sti.yy. M.rr/ 

Cirn '^t/uAyy < yt?ur *''**/■'* - 

£>/ur-yc'*^ ey&y-^ *\ ^y 

/6.AT^>9^) AC a^/Arrz A 

y-Cfiif<r>v- "A ^A - // / / -e /y & * s t* ait' A < n '* yy ^ ~~-* 

^A^ra cAy' I*-- tfnvistfixy */ 

~ - _ 2; _ f/vSL 


fruit 


A. L. S 0 of Richard Steele to Sir Thomas Hamner, March 21, 1714 







































































Diaries 


163 


You have added the authority of reason to an 
Implicit relyance on your character in convincing 
Yr most obedient & most humble servant, 

Richard Steele 

Samuel Johnson died on December 13, 1784; 
on September 4th of that year he wrote a 
number of letters from Ashbourne, three of 
which are published in whole or in part in Dr. 
Hill’s edition of Boswell, but one in my posses¬ 
sion seems not to have been printed. I do 
not know the name of the man to whom it 
was addressed, but I think it must have been 
the King’s Librarian. The handwriting shows 
no signs of feebleness. 


Sir:— 

I am pleased that you have been able to adorn the 
royal library with a book which I believe to be very 
rare, for I have not seen it. I have a very good copy* 
and did not know that it had been printed on two 
kinds of paper. The Polyglot Bible is undoubtedly 
the greatest performance of English typography, per¬ 
haps of all typography, and therefore ought to appear 
in its most splendid form among the books of the 
King of England. I wish you like success in all your 
researches. 

The part of your letter that relates to a writer 
whom you do not name, has so much tenderness, 
benevolence, and liberality, in language so unlike the 




164 'Rambles in autograph Uanb 


talk of trade, that it must be a flinty bosom that is 
not softened into gratitude. 

It has now pleased God to restore my health to a 
much better state, than when I parted from London; 
if my strength increases, indeed if it does not grow 
less, I shall hope to concert measures with you, and, 
by your help, to carry on the design to considerable 
advantage. 

In the mean time accept, dear sir, my sincere thanks 
for your generous offer and friendly regard. Event 
is uncertain and fallacious, but of good intention the 
merit stands upon a basis that never can be shaken. 

Add to your other favors that of writing often to, 
Sir, 

Your most humble servant, 
Sam: Johnson 

Ashburn, Sept. 4, 1784. 

I trouble you with two letters. 

“Pretty Fanny,” as Dr. Johnson called 
Miss Burney, is reasonably sure of a per¬ 
manent place in men’s memories, because of 
her diaries if not for her novels; in fact she 
wrote only two novels of merit, and they are 
of that order which, at this day, are more 
written about than read. Austin Dobson 
said that the greatest debt of gratitude we owe 
to Fanny Burney is that she prepared the way 
for Jane Austen! Fanny would have sulked 
and pouted at such a dubious compliment. 





Samuel Johnson 





























VWtlc. 

(Wrv % fc. 

C[^X G>Ut^jXvW, Aj4v 'V(ov~ c \ javlti (V (*v ^ <Vkj 

j^tvjVU tw^, vw<U ^ > <(*«$** 4' $ ^ 4 

£(Wu4' tWjU-f VOa tvMl W -^> (j l ^| J | ^ tM-iy tU- 

.w 


% £jv <1 J& fcMjJis i lUo J[\^ 'VHi, fi^UM^ 4\^^h 

|vv *|<*n UrtX O^^uX, M WUtliwv 

OjJl. | k’*' ^ q trfaL v<~ ^cvtvV l ffc Jiki-Ay 'ihj/U^ 

tw G*-(m tyW^ A^vtA- UM*. ^ . * • -" 

> S •* .,1 ,. i- . 

(AiA W ^WA- t4^v fajruM <VU ^ 


a. ; 


... ' , A,; . / 


A ‘ ’ ' W /tPsVLiJt 


(/{jLiruuM* Jt\X'b VjG'ft- j'fJfo' 

^ j*w 4 vA4v ( !vt> ^ 


Last page of A. L. So (2 pages) of Samuel Johnson, September 4, 1784 





































































































































































2>iaries 


165 


For her second novel, Cecilia , she received 
only £250, which seems a small sum when we 
think of the amazing popularity of Evelina; 
but it may have been a handsome compensa¬ 
tion in those times. Fanny tells with justi¬ 
fiable pride that Burke made her many most 
eloquent compliments on this book, “too 
delicate either to shock or sicken the nicest 
ear”; and she wrote to “Daddy” Crisp, 
thanking him for his approving words but 
adding: “though I cannot say they ever gave 
me a promise of such success as last Tuesday’s 
post brought me in a letter from Mr. Burke!!! ” 
That Burke letter, often quoted, is so well 
known that I hesitate to reproduce it; but 
the original before me has that peculiar charm 
which clings to the actual pen-tracings of a 
great man. 

Madam— 

I should feel exceedingly to blame, if I could refuse 
myself the natural satisfaction, & to you the just but 
poor return of my best thanks for the very great in¬ 
struction & entertainment I have received from the 
new present you have bestowed on the publick. 

There are few, I believe I may say fairly, there are 
none at all, that will not find themselves better in- 



166 IRambles In Hutograpb Hanb 


formed concerning human nature, & their stock of 
observation enrich’d by reading your Cecilia. 

They certainly will, let their experience in life & 
manners be what it may. The arrogance of age 
must submit to be taught by youth and beauty. 

You have crowded into a few small volumes an incred¬ 
ible variety of characters; most of them well planned, 
well supported, and well contrasted with each other. 

If there be any fault in this respect, it is one, in 
which you are in no great danger of being imitated. 
Justly as your characters are drawn, perhaps they 
are too numerous; but I beg pardon: I fear it is quite 
in vain to preach economy to those who are come 
young to excessive & sudden opulence. 

I might trespass on your delicacy if I should fill 
my letter to you with what I fill my conversation to 
others. I should be troublesome to you alone, if I 
should tell you all I feel, and think, on the natural 
vein of humour, the tender pathetick, the compre¬ 
hensive & noble moral, & the sagacious observation, 
that appear quite throughout that extraordinary per¬ 
formance. In an age distinguished by producing ex¬ 
traordinary women, I hardly dare to tell you where 
my opinion would place you amongst them. I respect 
your modesty, that will not endure the commenda¬ 
tions which your merit forces from everybody. 

I have the honour to be with great gratitude, re¬ 
spect and esteem, 

Madam, 

Your most obedient 

& most humble serv‘, 

White Hall. Edm. Burke 

July 29th, 1782. 





Edmund Burke 


























CJ/A 




3 > , * 

-fc. 

Zt ZZa/ajl, J cr£^r ~~~~; 

fz/Aa/ts Step J£*(/', ft-4/fusr<\^ %'^/a^uy^ > jy Z/ Jsfa. / ■ 

iri*Z Zfffa wAarT^., fzZfas/ Zay/ ZZa a Zj /Z*~> j 

& * ' t , ' j 

j? la r L /c*S6rtc l rzAit^ 3f 6 *;' cr/metL A/tu * A J/six {// 
jrfrttn- ZZV /L&A)^J/ULuZ £jl</C' <Jt j/srVt) fa. /&yst4./6't£ m j 

> ^ ZZa^jl/ yZiZcU/tJ Z f faALf t/df /dLC r &Zj /&UJ3L A u. ] 

fLT7t^ d/~ &/l, /ZjuA flft AZ f-LA'Z~ sZ/ aZ /Z.J fi t- Z/> A J l/ £/$tl.y, ’ 

LL'fU'i- isJ} /to. *K A A~ Zf<X./zt7~i_S Jy //LAir ' £ Z.^Z^ y 

i^JirVA. /tfa_ <2 for LdZ) A? /t '/L^fscj L/0-tcr- Z* LcZZa _, ** 

c< ^£^ ^r/fLCfg/^ ft/ cZZ, Zt/ P.t/jt rzA h &l: ^/L..^yZj * 

^ /ls f/rZ a-Ac/^ fa_j_f . I?4 1 

/a Zi AtUty/Z Z// 0<rns/Z ty/feJuJt . 

*ZjUOA u/ fa)l) faf£ 4-j/cft/ J'/haZ/ 

LfL'&y ll^lyAZs ^ArztJp /jAZ&M/ l t/isASj f/t^/Z 
/OiZZ \./l^yAfajQ) f /tZ> fvl/Z- £f7i ZdL j/tZ &rc/Z. e&*/£-S’/fh*'*'. - 
JjAMisu. 'ZZ Arc-f jA^IA /* -/Zs cZ-Zs aycjlj ■ 

/V~ZZlZ AslJL^ C/<_ Aj ^T-CjlZ £/>cc •AJ&t-\ 




First page of A. L. S. of Edmund Burke to Fanny Burney, July 29, 1782 











1 




aa faster /X&r-iuJe*? Jfesv/s^' 

/to AMyuA^TUA • ^ /his// tsij y/jA*§47<„' f *//^LAsr-ti-£+* j>z*j/&3 
* Zu- /;cua_ d~ £e <L*~*S'/>u/ /* /-/j^^ /<r/j As*. * | 

({trzi'Uj / &zAj^Su> 0 If Jtc/iuL- ftyiu/oAcZAJ* 

?---• * cf/^y/tc// jfz/L /* 

fafr Si'tfeu*- & frrvf/^ f<T/tjL/t ~y fo<£/- faf //fr6lASA//*Ic~ ~£ r \ 
?//jyj</, <yvS/fftcfy /l 

JAj-tu) /}$-- ^Au. a/J //&/, ^a3 //a /, s?i~ /& 

\ & <^£_. Sjfr /LU ht^TisTf //cl '/l /) let- A, f /7/cffry's t* 

< Jf /t-f/tfu AcArt/, jf ///> i/AycLcctioJ y/ir7rd/zf+t<___ J 

; /f,u</iu//ritti^/A-&/- //ju/ * 

> t//t- ctu. Ayfpj "bis/tAy ttcsjLe^ /y ^Aa^ZcAiac^ SAt/fn^/^ (Acyyy 

L /U*?**?*~y y /ly^/ ^AAAs/f /t/cf ytCL /W^2JT_/ /Hz, #y? ~ v 


M 


a/ 2^ y^fjLUL^y toe- Afrctoepj/' //a 


/«- 


jf f y*t*s*^* .*; 



fral-T-i/ f/+r-CAS lie l&J . 


1//ao±s//' /tocj-nr/& / 


(L, Z^t// 


//a/- Art// &s/ tJc/lcyZJL* /i*As ^frcs^cl^A/t/lLS 

m 

t*) rzyiuA 

| ^ t*f**r- /Jtu)^ 

4/for" ZfctAA- a/Z^Cju/P^ 

*79 Z . ?mAHz/ //?* 

» , A , ' //? Zot/lA-^,, 

!• bMf/jnyj (14*44/7 t^£s*ArA/f/jt/z*xt<s / /tt/tr^fttoryu* Ai^Ah^^ 

W> M A a / P M. . _ i- S\ m * / '/ % . y. — f. 


^ vyi/cta*/? __ 

'^l <fl/L/L</ i/a-SKc/, » 


Last page of A. L. S. of Edmund Burke to Fanny Burney, July 29, 1782 



Diaries 


167 


My best compliments & congratulations to Doctor 
Burney on the great honour acquired to his family. 

(Address: Miss Burney—) 

Dr. Burney wrote that when he told John¬ 
son that Burke had thanked Fanny for her 
instruction , Johnson said: “ Tis very true, 
Sir, no man can read it without having ideas 
awakened in his mind that will mend the 
heart. When Fanny reasons and writes from 
her own feelings she is exquisite.” 

It is rather a far cry from Johnson and 
Burke to Lord Monboddo, but autograph 
portfolios sometimes make strange bedfellows. 
James Burnett, who was a judge and who 
became Lord Monboddo, learned and eccen¬ 
tric, gained immortality less by his learning 
than by his theory that “the orang-outang 
was of a class of the human species, and that 
its want of speech was merely accidental,” a 
thesis which was popularised into the assertion, 
more interesting to the multitude, that man was 
originally possessed of a tail. He was ridiculed 
in his day, but we know now that his views 
were advanced and scientific and that he was, 
in a way, anticipating Darwinism. His letter 




1 68 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


is addressed to Thomas Cadell, the elder, fam¬ 
ous bookseller and publisher, and the book he 
refers to is probably Antient Metaphysics , the 
first volume of which was published in 1779. 


Edin. 11 March 1779. 

Sir— 

Mr. Balfour will send you by the first ship from 
Leith a new book of mine, not yet published here and 
which I do not intend should be published till it be 
first published by you. It will not be as you may see 
from the Title a popular book nor of great sale; but 
it will not disgrace your shop in the opinion of the 
learned; and it is to look for such books, as I am 
informed, that the learned come to your shop. Your 
profit by it, I am afraid will not be great; but as I 
hear there are but few books published at present, 
you may think it worth shop-room though I do not 
put my name upon the title page, you need not make 
it a secret that it is my work. As soon as you get the 
book, send copies to the following persons: The Earl 
of Mansfield, Sir John Pringle, Mr. Bankus, President 
of the Royal Society, Dr. Morton, Secretary of that 
Society, and Mr. George Scot, Commissioner of Cus¬ 
toms. I refer you to Mr. Balfour for the particulars 
concerning the advertisement a copy of which he will 
send you. 

I am, Sir— 

Your most obedt humble servant, 

Ja s . Burnett 

(Address: Mr. Thomas Cadell —Bookseller in the 
Strand, London.) 





Robert, Baron Clive 































































































































































































































































Diaries 


I69 


A very different sort of a Lord was Robert 
Clive, the Baron of Plassey. After he had com¬ 
pleted his conquests in India, by which he trans¬ 
formed the East India Company from a mere 
association of merchants into a body of princes 
enjoying vast revenues and ruling millions of 
people, he went back to England; but those who 
succeeded him in the government did not pos¬ 
sess his commanding ability and fell into so 
many errors and abuses that the resulting dis¬ 
order and hostilities demanded his return. Ac¬ 
cordingly he was sent back by the Company to 
effect a reform. With four of his trusted friends 
he reached Calcutta in May, 1765, and in the 
ensuing November he wrote the letter which 
follows. The story of his later controversies 
at home and of his suicide is a familiar one. 


Calcutta, 5th Nov. 1765. 

Dear Pybus— 

I must request you will not detain these [illegible] 
a moment, they are dispatched upon business of the 
utmost consequence to the Company and are to have 
one thousand rupees if they perform their journey to 
Madras in 24 days. You are the best judge, if they 
can proceed any part of the way by water. 

The purport of our letter to the Presidency is to desire 





170 iRambles in autograph Xanb 


that Messrs. Rupell, Aldersey, Kelsall, and Floyer may 
be sent immediately to supply the vacant seats in Coun¬ 
cil by the suspension and resignation of Messrs. Bur- 
dett, Gray, Senior, & Leicester; this settlement is rotten 
to the very core & I shall despair of going through with 
the undertaking without the assistance of the above- 
mentioned gentlemen. I have desired they may set 
out immediately overland & Mr. Kelsall may accom¬ 
pany them. Be sure to give me notice of their motions 
that I may send some Seapoys as far as Cuttuch to 
eschort them. They will I imagine have nothing to 
apprehend if they come privately & without a large 
attendance—they should have relays of bearers. 

The reformation of this settlement, the reduction of 
the military expenses, & the collection of the revenues 
of these ... is a great undertaking indeed; however 
we have already made a great progress & I make no 
doubt but the abilities & assistance of the Madras 
gentlemen will enable me to accomplish at last the 
intentions of the Company. 

Enclosed I send you a short sketch of the Company’s 
prospects at present; they will be yearly improving. 

I hope you are getting ready my Long Cloth &c. 
Your diamond has been valued by 3 . . . jewellers & the 
medium given by my attorneys amounts to £2666.13— 
4 d so that you may finaly settle every thing by paying 
the Ballance to Kelsall agreeable to your own desire. 

I am, dear Pybus— 

Yr affec. friend & servt, 

(Endorsed— Clive 

The R Honble L d Clive. 

Dated 5 th ) Noy . 
and 30th ) 0 




i. 


y*. 















^**-*^^- 




iJtce 


v.../ tt 


■ / ^2^-7 







/4*~ 





^C*rX 




*6" 


f - 


/ . 

f^ifff- /3. 4 - u -y„ <*—^ 

i ' 

»-^y //^* r ^ / 

^ * 7 "*^ * 7 



,£*v- ■-. ^'^^-^.*4 

..-- . *. w '.WV V *■• -. ^1. 



Last page of A. L. S. (3 pages) of Robert, Baron Clive, November 5, 1765 





































































































Biariee 


171 


When William Petty, Earl of Shelburne and 
later Marquis of Lansdowne, wrote this letter 
to Lord Egremont, he was only twenty-five, but 
he had served in the army in Germany and in 
the House of Commons. He stood with Chat¬ 
ham against the attempt to coerce the American 
colonies, although, while he advocated concil¬ 
iation, he was strongly opposed to American 
independence. Had his advice been followed 
we might never have gained that independence, 
so perhaps George III. and his silly Ministers 
were better friends of ours than Chatham or 
Shelburne without intending it. This letter 
indicates the enlightenment of Shelburne’s 
views. At the time it was written, Pitt had 
resigned, England had abandoned Prussia, 
and Spain had joined France in war against 
England; but the peace of 1763 was in contem¬ 
plation, when Canada was to be given up by 
France and with it the island of Cape Breton, 
of which Choiseul said: “I ceded it on purpose 
to destroy the English nation. They were 
fond of American dominion and I resolved 
they should have enough of it.” Nearly a 
century and a half has gone by, but England 




172 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


still has Canada and Cape Breton, and the 
nation has not yet been destroyed. 

Whitton, July 9, 1762. 

My Dear Lord : 

I send you inclos'd a Letter from Francis.—I have 
written to him that the opening he mentions of the 
German Commissariat & Prince Ferdinand’s Intrigues 
in it may be very proper. The consideration of 
occonomy may be even extended to N. America 
which has been little consider’d, and where the War 
has been carried on in like manner however, without 
Plan, Knowledge or Foresight of any sort. But that 
at present it is necessary to bring back the minds of 
the People to the origin of the War, and to their State 
in 1754. That & that alone can dispose men to form 
just Judgments of the conditions of a Peace whenever 
they may come. The expence &c. of the War then 
becomes a strong additional argument after it has 
been first shewn that the intent of it was to defend 
not to acquire which is impossible by the nature of it, 
being different from all former Wars, even on the 
Continent, where however the chief part of our expence 
now lies. He is desirous of the Papers relative to the 
Kg. of Prussia’s offer in 1756—as Mr. Fox, tho he was 
Secretary of St at e that year knows nothing of them. I 
have told him in all events to come here on Monday. 
If your Lordship have anything to add, you ’ll be so 
good therefore to let me know before that. 

I am with great regard, my dear Lord, 

Your most Faithful Servt. 

(To Lord Egremont). Shelburne 




Diaries 


173 


The following letter from Chatham was 
written shortly before he resigned from the 
ministry and when Spain was diligently 
seeking for reasons to declare war. 


Hayes, Sunday, June 29th 1760. 

Private — 

Dear Sir— 

Wanting very much your lights and assistance in a 
matter of great consequence, I should be extremely glad 
if your engagements should happen to leave you at 
liberty tomorrow morning, in which case I will beg the 
favour of seeing you in St. James’s Square at a little 
before eleven. The matter in question is the ground of 
the sentences of condemnation in Doctor’s Commons 
against ships under Spanish Commissions, the Spanish 
Ambassador having advanced positively and strongly 
in a memorial on this embarrassing subject, that all 
Spanish ships have been immediately and indiscrimin¬ 
ately condemn’d at Doctor’s Commons for carrying 
French property. I trust this allegation will be found 
unsupported in fact, and if, as I hope, regard has been 
had in the proceedings of the Court of Admiralty to 
the King’s orders and instructions of ye 5" Octr. 1756, 
I may be enabled to answer with advantage that part, 
at least, of the memorial, which contains an imputation 
without foundation. I thought it might not be useless 
to break thus far the subject I wish to confer with you 
upon. I am with perfect esteem & consideration 
Dear Sir, 

most faithfully & affec ly yrs— 

W M Pitt 



i74 IRambles in autograph ILanb 


There is a time-honoured device of the 
unscrupulous autograph-hunter—who may 
be more justly called autograph-poacher 
—much vaunted by Mr. Charles Robin¬ 
son, to wit: that of asking of the victim 
some apparently innocent question, usu¬ 
ally of a nature flattering to the self¬ 
esteem of the personage addressed. Nearly 
every one bites at this pleasant bait— 
statesmen, soldiers, authors—authors more 
greedily than any of the others. It is not 
disagreeable to be requested for informa¬ 
tion as to when such and such a book was 
first published or for advice to a literary 
neophyte, gazing from afar at the star of 
genius. In the course of his experience a 
collector constantly encounters examples of 
this despicable method, the knowledge of 
which brings the blush of shame to his in¬ 
genuous countenance. I have been much in¬ 
terested in the success of our William Riddle. 
I began by believing in Mr. Riddle’s sincerity 
when I first came upon his illustrious name 
as the recipient of this letter from John 
Ruskin: 






John Ruskin 

From an old woodcut 










Diaries 


175 


Corpus Christi College 
Oxford. 

My dear Mr. Riddle— 

I did not in the least mean to hurt you—but if pos¬ 
sible—which to my surprise I see was possible—to 
stagger you, and get you to think in other directions. 
You may be of great use—none of us know what use—• 
we must all wait and do what we are asked by God 
to do. When He wants you to lecture, He will find 
you the place & means. He would for instance enable 
you to convince me or some other hard “man of prac¬ 
tical sense” that what you tried to say was right—and 
we could help—nay send you to say it. But if you can¬ 
not convince us neither would you others less docile. 

“Self-adoration” is just thinking that the world 
can’t do without us, nor God manage his own business. 

I talk—but only because chance has always forced 
me into positions where it was required. I should 
most thankfully hold my tongue were I not pushed 
into places where speech is demanded. I have to 
speak on Thursday—I wish the audience were at 
Jerusalem or Jericho—or anywhere but in hearing of 
me. Go on thinking and making your purposes clear. 
The time will come for talk if they are so. 

Ever truly, sir, 

Affectionately yours, 

J. Ruskin 

This was characteristic. That sort of easy 
familiarity with the Deity which enables Mr. 
Ruskin to assert that God will tell Riddle 
when to “lecture,” while only “chance” is 




176 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanh 


needed to set Ruskin to talking is rather start¬ 
ling; and his delusion that he was “a hard 
man of practical sense’’ is amusing, for prac¬ 
ticality was by no means one of his distinctive 
virtues. But then he was Ruskin, and that 
is enough. 

I began to doubt the good faith of Mr. Rid¬ 
dle when I next discovered a letter to him 
written by John Stuart Mill, which is prac¬ 
tically sensible enough. Mr. Riddle is now 
concerned about questions of political economy 
and not about delivering lectures. 


Blackheath Park, Kent. 

Oct. 29, 1870. 

Dear Sir: 

No question can be greater or more urgent than 
that of the relations of the poor to the rich, and though 
for the rectification of those relations political and 
social reforms are the principal requisite, I am quite 
prepared to admit that “practical engineering meas¬ 
ures” may be highly useful auxiliaries. But of this 
part of the subject I cannot deem myself a competent 
judge; though I should be very willing, when I know 
your proposals, to tell you whether, in my opinion, 
there are any objections to them on the score of po¬ 
litical economy. 


I am, Dear Sir, 

Yours very faithfully— 

J. S. Mill 


W. Riddle Esq. 




Corpus tf^risti CoIIigt 
Oxford 


JLuul. ^ 

] j jujL tL - 

P r t" J\<-*+-£ r ' V^ ^ 

e- _ y 

v S ^ 

J *« 

j.eJ 

0 ^ . Or-t_ 4 *^-^ 

^W-O ' ^ 

JL <: oA^ UrA - 


_ z ^ i UrC^ 


1 w 

^a z 

0 -^ J <rd ^ 

-f~ f~ CsL-e-^ i ~ t ~^~^~ * 

^ ^ . A I^jlo^A , 

j» - / w ^c~ 7^^ * 

, ■ y - c^ ^ 

_ ^ WU- h ^ ’ 

)/' ^ p l " L^ J X-fi-^<- 

tr e&z~£^-ey u -^' J i 1 

cLeJ? 57 2 ^ 

^ ^ Y- < ^ ^ B ^- 


Firzt page of A. L. S. (3 pages) of John Ruskin to William Riddle, undated 








Diaries 


177 


That Mr. Riddle was less of a lecturer or 
a political-economist than a skilful suppliant 
for autographs, is further commended to my 
belief by this letter which he elicited from 
Charles Dickens: 


Office of All the Year Round. 

No. 26 Wellington Street, Strand. 
London W. C. Friday The Ninth. 

November, 1866. 


Dear Sir: 

I have read your little daughter’s story. I do not 
understand whether or not you suppose it to have 
any claim to publication, or any address to general 
readers. If you do, I think you are altogether mis¬ 
taken. 

Regarded as the production of a very clever child, 
it is interesting and curious. But the working of 
children’s minds, when watched, is always so. I have 
certainly known other children to write as well, and 
to display more fancy, who had no faculty whatever 
of authorship in them as they grew older. If the 
case was mine, I would show just the same playful 
interest in this effort of childish invention as in any 
other more usual one; I would on no consideration 
lead the child to think that I regarded it as very 
exceptional; and I would quietly observe (taking 
some years for the purpose) whether it developed 
or died out. 


Faithfully yours, 

Charles Dickens 


William Riddle Esquire 


12 





178 IRambles in Hutocjrapb Xanb 


He also worked the familiar game on 
Richard Cobden, who sent him this letter, 
directed to “ Wm. Riddle, South Lambeth, S:” 

Athenaeum Club, 27 July, 1864. 

Sir:— 

There is a volume published in Ludgate St. called, 
I think, “ Men of the Time” or some such title which 
contains some dates and facts of my career in public 
life, which are correct. I know no other work to 
which I could refer, apart from the general records 
of the political events of the day. 

I am your obedt servt, 

R. Cobden 

Wm. Riddle Esq. 

After all this, one cannot help feeling sorry 
that Ruskin did not hurt him even more than 
he thought he did; but it is quite pleasant to 
observe these men of high fame and engross¬ 
ing mental occupations, cheerfully giving 
information and advice to a stranger who 
appears to have solicited it without any right 
to ask it. Perhaps, after all, I have mis¬ 
judged Mr. Riddle, for I am judging him 
merely by the circumstantial evidence. 




CHAPTER X 


SOME NINETEENTH-CENTURY WRITERS 


Nineteenth-Century Writers—De Quincey—His Letter to His 
Solicitor—Carlyle on De Quincey—Carlyle Letter to Mrs. 
Carlyle—Thackeray to Ainsworth—Thackeray to Fraser— 
Dickens’s Letter on the Staplehurst Railway Disaster— 
Shirley Brooks—Brooks to Artemus Ward—Henry Thomas 
Buckle—Locker-Lampson. 


It is always a surprise to the elderly person 
to find that the great literary reputations of 
his early days are becoming antiquated. It 
seems but a little while ago when Carlyle, De 
Quincey, and Leigh Hunt were very modem 
names, while now they appear to belong to a 
fairly remote past. My publisher friend 
would doubtless regard their works as having 
“no commercial value,” unless as examples of 
the bygone in books and for some associations 
connected with them. Whether the change 
in the whole character of English literature 


i8o Gambles in autograph Xanb 


in the last thirty years has been for the better, 
it would be presumptuous to venture an 
assertion; and the opinion of a sexagenarian 
on such a subject is of little value in these 
progressive days. The tastes of readers as 
well as the style of writers change radically 
in times of fierce activities. Still, the early 
twentieth century is not more at variance with 
the middle nineteenth than the early nine¬ 
teenth was with the eighteenth. It must be 
remembered also that while the multitude, 
whose approval gives the “commercial value’’ 
to the products of the publishers, and whose 
preferences are noised abroad if not in part 
created by the newspaper press, may have 
forgotten the old favourites, there is a goodly 
number of readers who are fond of something 
besides fiction and the popular novelties; and 
although even with them the amiable Hunt is 
now chiefly a pleasant memory, the best of De 
Quincey and most of Carlyle endure in favour. 
Naturally I am speaking of my own country, 
for no American, unless it may be Mr. George 
W. Smalley, would dare to utter any views in 
regard to literary conditions in England. 




Some 1 Rineteentb*Centun> Mr iters 181 


There is always an element of fascination 
about De Quincey due to his peculiar person¬ 
ality. He was a strange creature, ever on 
the point of doing something great but never 
accomplishing it. I have quite a number of 
his letters, from which I select only one; rather 
a long one, it is true, but in his small, distinct, 
and legible handwriting it fills only four pages 
of ordinary note paper. It displays the dif¬ 
fuseness, the needless propensity to elaborate 
every thought, the protracted efforts to reach 
a definite point, which characterise all his 
writings. He could have said to his negli¬ 
gent agent all that was necessary in a fourth of 
the space he occupied. He stopped only at 
the end of the last page of his paper, and if the 
sheet had been folio he would have filled it 
to the very close. The letter is severe on the 
lawyer, who was manifestly slow, but lawyers 
are apt to be dilatory about matters which 
seem to them not to be very pressing. It 
indicates some of the miseries of having liter¬ 
ary clients—their prolixity, the queer mean- 
derings of their minds, their impatience, their 
lack of sound business sense. We must admit 



182 IRamblea in autograph Hant> 


however that the solicitor was somewhat 
remiss in this instance, but then we do not 
know his side of the story, and one may not 
rely implicitly on De Quincey’s statements of 
fact about any subject. He often saw things 
through the mists of opium and they lead to 
exaggeration. 


Monday Evening, July 17, 1837. 

My dear Sir:— 

On Friday last I wrote a note to you containing 
three distinct questions. I had in return a verbal 
message to this effect—that you were too much 
fatigued by your journey from the South to reply 
at that time, but that you would take an early 
opportunity of doing so. Three days have since 
elapsed: and no answer having arrived, I am com¬ 
pelled to write again most urgently on the same 
subject. 

My questions are in substance these:— 

1. What steps have you taken, or are you taking 
with regard to the loan upon the reversion? 

2. What is the precise situation of the Guarantee 
fund? That is to say, is that fund detained as a 
guarantee to yourself by way of indemnification for 
security given by you to the Caledonian—or as a 
guarantee directly to the Caledonian? 

3. I have [upon grounds stated in my last note] 
a claim on the Caledonian for £16—13—4. Now 
this sum, trifling as it may seem, has unfortunately 
become of importance to me, exhausted as I am by 





4 



Thomas De Quincey 



Some 1 Rinetcent[>£enturp UUriters 183 


the endless delays in these loan negociations. What 
then is my proper course for recovering it? 

These are my three questions: to the first only my 
eldest son received on Saturday a verbal answer, 
viz: “that you strongly advised me not to borrow.” 
Now this is perplexing to me: my application to your¬ 
self never was for advice—as upon the general question 
of borrowing or not borrowing [that was not in my 
choice] but for your practical aid in effecting the loan. 
Then, as to the particular advice, how is that re- 
concileable with your previous letters and acts—all 
implying the very opposite advice? Or, supposing 
it were reconcileable, and taking it separately upon 
its own merits, by what arguments do you justify 
such an advice? Why should my reversion afford 
a less eligible basis for a loan than the reversions of 
other people? 

Finally let me say that you seem most inadequately 
to appreciate either my conduct or my present situa¬ 
tion. 

First, with regard to my situation [all caused by the 
lingering course of the negociations for the loan], let 
me rehearse a few of its leading points—a family in 
Cumberland sold up and effectually ruined; their 
credit having now been irreparably blighted; myself 
hunted in every direction by writs and diligences; 
two decrees already issued against me, and execution 
rapidly approaching; others daily threatened with 
insolent clamors at my door;—finally, from mere 
grief and agitation of mind at witnessing these ruinous 
consequences of delay, sickness now making ravages 
in one member of my family such as I do not wish to 
speak of or to think of; but the fact you may as- 




184 IRamblea in autograph Xanb 


certain from Major Miller. Will it be denied—that 
any agent of reasonable activity armed with the 
power contained under my uncle’s will, might have 
averted these heavy calamities? 

Well, such being my situation, secondly what has 
been my conduct? Take one fact in illustration of 
it—viz. the fact of my extreme delicacy in neither 
making, nor allowing to be made, any application 
to the Caledonian office for the information wanted. 
In that way I could have obtained all I sought; and 
in the most authentic shape. Yet, because such a 
course seemed liable to the construction that I did 
not repose confidence in you, I abstained from it; 
and that too after all applications to yourself had 
proved fruitless. Nay, to such an excess did I carry 
this delicacy—a delicacy which you seem so little 
to have appreciated,—that even after your abrupt 
departure to London without even a message left 
for me, had made an almost open avowal that you 
did not think my affairs worthy of any attention, 
and had thus cancelled any claim which the most 
sensitively honest person could fancy to a further 
continuance of such delicacy, even then—[and solely 
upon this consideration that such a step would convey 
to the Caledonian an expression of distrust towards 
yourself]—and (in the midst of my intense and surely 
most natural desire to know the real situation of my 
affairs) would not apply to that office. 

Surely you will perceive in all this, as well as in my 
steadfast forbearance to put any the very slightest 
question to your clerks during your absence, conduct 
the most honorable and considerate towards your¬ 
self; and that too under the most trying perplexities 




'CAj f - L-faA<L*4y 

" (Lf hr**— lefts' <fy 
U%~ £^U>/~ h<rflr-t7r %d~ V 


flyM 


7 


- y - — - - - - -- y - &tJ fld'^Uto'T- 4^Uj/ Irtl/rfy 

id id 2W ^ 04iy cA**~ «L£ 

fld for^Ji/iUiJCo*^ LnuryiJT^ (m & A- 

•j*U4 ,*KU~ UrUk^ fa**— '/f^ 

uraJvJZu. 4U ^ ^ 

it: /y/thhcit^a^ - 

/ udtiud JL* rf£ 

(rfOH y*h Od /Tjjh**-. 

Pu^dysykrlk^*A dL i£i f is in^+s *i P*y jUr 
tn y f&jl&/^yiA4£5di£y*+ 
yun^d^uu*--/, CnJu^/^fiZ ftun^ TdrdT- ad 
CrhJ^vy+43 fcir*dt _ °3 Hd: fc* udirdt^ bu^iy*y 

fa^dudid t*~ Ur*+— C^&fH+^if / d**£'?/rl4Lid 
yi*StTC*y^dd^ id yi<~djrfid7 Vk*vfyt+\ 

'h{j-. TiidL cdud" fa- toj7iLf-yic- 

dtfld fsyy^diJLy frfhd^x^ crM^dny i }dd-^ furfur 
• y<d^d^^^nc^ ifid- 7id iTu^ttdd^dd 

i^~tkJi *tir\di~~iy ^ksvty Ac... 7^7 (^^V?t*4s77L* i/iu+£* 7*/uLin-£o 
tCmdU huluocr-i/si*--. j 

^ a. 


Last page of A. L. S. (4 pages) of Thomas De Quincey, July 17, 1837 





















Some Blneteentb^Centur? Winters 185 


or even calamities which I believed you to have been 
capable of averting had you chosen to exert your¬ 
self. To such conduct on my part I cannot suppose 
that you will any longer delay to make a corresponding 
return; if not by any practical services of the kind 
which I had once anticipated, at all events by giving 
me the information which I have so earnestly sought 
from you. 

Very sincerely yours, 

T. De Quincey 


We are told that De Quincey was utterly 
unable to take his affairs firmly in hand and 
deal with them, but he seems to have under¬ 
stood fully the subject of the loan on the 
reversion. Mr. Hogg says: “During my edi¬ 
torship of Titan . . . De Quincey often as¬ 
tonished me by his shrewdness in the affairs 
of everyday life.” I think that his strange 
ways in matters financial about which so 
many tales are related were due less to in¬ 
capacity than to indifference. 

De Quincey was, after a fashion, liked by 
Carlyle, who privately abused him less than 
he did most people who were unfortunate 
enough to meet him. Yet T. C. wrote of his 
friend in the Reminiscences in that exasper- 




186 Gambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


ating manner of his which makes me long to 
tell him what an absurdly conceited, cross- 
grained old curmudgeon he was. I quote: 

He was a pretty little creature, full of wire-drawn 
ingenuities, bankrupt enthusiasms, bankrupt pride, 
with the finest silver-toned low voice, and most 
elaborate gently-winding courtesies and ingenuities 
in conversation. “What would n’t one give to have 
him in a box, and take him out to talk!” That was 
Her criticism of him, and it was right good. A bright, 
ready and melodious talker, but in the end inconclu¬ 
sive and long-winded. 


The old boor seems to have thought that 
he could make amends for his boorishness by 
writing “her” with a capital H. Mrs. Car¬ 
lyle showed her goodness of heart, for she 
nursed the Opium Eater through a long illness 
—at her own home, I believe—and De Quincey 
said of her, “ She was, indeed, the most angelic 
woman I ever met upon this—God’s earth.” 
The story of Carlyle and his wife has been 
told over and over again, and in so many 
different ways that it has become quite weari¬ 
some. The subject has been talked out and 
written out, people have quarrelled fiercely 





Thomas Carlyle 






















































* 













































Some TOneteent[>Centun? Mriters 187 


over it in books and pamphlets, volumes have 
been filled with it. The case was evidently 
that of two people of genius, with all the irri¬ 
tability of genius—especially Carlyle—having 
no children to occupy their attention and draw 
them out of themselves; both Scotch, who 
loved and squabbled, squabbled and loved, 
and talked and wrote overmuch about their 
respective infirmities. I always try to keep 
myself impartial between the two, but even 
the laborious efforts of the man’s warmest 
partisans fail to convince me that he was not 
a sour, selfish, unbearable person with an 
exaggerated sense of his own importance. 
I think this long letter of Carlyle’s to his wife 
contains some evidence of his characteristics. 
I do not know whether it has ever been pub¬ 
lished and I am too indolent to search for it 
in the huge mass of Carlyliana. 

Scotsbrig, Friday afternoon— 

Dearest— 

A thousand thanks for your excellent little letter. 
I despaired of it altogether for this day: but there 
it has come in, from the pocket of Jamie, and done 
me a world of good. Do not, pray, do not, let me 
want for a pennyworth so long as I am far from you. 



1 88 IRambles in Hutograpb Xant> 


You found, hardly decipherable, on a sheet hurried 
off from Ecclefechan with the sea still jumbling in 
my ears, and all chaos in my heart,—some notification 
that I had come hither; that I had found vague tid¬ 
ings of my mother being dangerously ill at Dumfries. 
A letter written yesterday there, to Jack, which I 
expect he has communciated to you, will explain that 
matters stood considerably better than we appre¬ 
hended. My mother had had a really bad turn, but 
was now out of danger and daily growing better. Our 
cattle and modes of conveyance here are what you 
know, or even worse. Nevertheless having once 
ascertained that my mother was out of danger, the 
next project was to drive up the old dilapidated lumber 
of a gig, with one of Austin’s plough-horses in it, 
next day (that was, yesterday) and surprise your 
mother at Breakfast. The remembrance of our last 
feat in that way, however, rather moderated my 
enthusiasm; and the day breaking up to be the warm¬ 
est and finest yet seen this season, and as if made on 
purpose for getting my mother home, I gave up 
Templand for that time, and bending all my indus¬ 
tries hitherward, happily tho’ wearisomely got the 
thing accomplished; and here the poor mother is, 
already greatly comforted, quieted, and not much 
worse than her wont. You can tell Jack: we did not 
need a chaise; we drove in the gig, and even took 
Gill and Ecclefechan by the way,—against my advice, 
but according to her earnest express desire. The 
sun shone all the way, and no wind blew except a 
breath from the west. To-day such an enterprise 
would not have been possible. 

As for me, I am washed all to rags; with one wish 




r. 


i h iv c ' y 


c f{- IWm mAu (}*i~ T/^-t 

Uni. UV- J '^^rJ Y l 

Ztf fcc > iuX ^ 1/1 ^ 

(^ ^ , Jvin^ ‘'U'WU. '*| </<**«* # 9.^ 

'J»w iv. - ^ 1 vT ?-‘?W,U~j 

^ urt , (.1 *- wtvl K'‘ K e -'~"-r< Yte 
v U^** J <^- H"* v*** 

At*. KJ i 3et ^ ^ 1 ~ 

v <vi UJ 

n, w i “* ' u r“’’. 

S.J »W> ^ ^<wt,-w 


First page of A. L. S. (12 pages) of Thomas Carlyle to his wife, undated but April, 1841 












, g 

SxSCo^A ^ . 

} W^JV tt*X '*-1 k-C ^KuZu 

t, W ^ ^OA Ir^w xW v^ Ifc*' 

vto/ »jkj ^ ‘ /to/t UlXc 

oj£ 1 ** W , ^ ^ ^ qA<yu/l 


vie, v.tf ^ t■=»— a wwt 

- ^ vW 

^wjfe -c u;V“J & 'v w ^ iU ’V ? 

‘ft, , v t U&/ h * ^-<J 'Uu.W^J • 

(yU tU wW4 J hUfos 5j>' 


^;2v^ m /u»r ^ W* - 

, ih a M •• a Cttt£ - 

, W Ia^vsvX^vCj ^ 

V,1 ^uV ttul ^W^T— ^‘4?' ^'‘VTVVT/ ‘ J • 
l4P^vJ ( ^Wf < y erv ^ ^’ c A,'UW\l* : ^ Im&*uA 

ivai Ik*. , <W0 X) • /UjWI *vH 

1 <r:^r ^ 


s, jL'furJ‘^j -- ^t^uf 

- f t ; i U^tm. c (^& , ^ 


Ict^^J h-Clxj' ‘J'lYH'vJ ^ 

1 WirxTt Vl At £C, -Vi^ ^11*.. ! 


Last page of A. L. S. (12 pages) of Thomas Carlyle to his wife, undated but 
April, 1841 




Some 1 Rineteentb*(Tentur\> Writers 189 


left, that all mortals would let me entirely alone;— 
my Goody’s letters are a decided exception: alas, 
I think her black eyes looking on me would be so 
beneficial; and yet do I not know how the spirit is 
willing and the flesh weak, and probably even she is 
better at a distance from me! 

The question when I am coming home, the only 
important question, I do not answer to-day. I will 
write again to-morrow. I have some thought of 
going by Newcastle, and seeing Miss Martineau; 
but I know not the days of the steamers yet. I mean 
to sit as nearly as possible altogether silent here. 
To consider what I wanted, and what I want! Indeed, 
the total deficiency of eligible locomotives, except 
one’s feet, gives me the greatest inducement not to 
•stir. . . . 

On the whole I rather think to day is your Sunday’s 
post at London. Alas, yes it is; Monday morning, 
at Chelsea, no possibility of a letter. I need not send 
this therefore till to morrow! Adieu, Dear good 
Jeannie; be patient with me, kind to me. 

Yours ever, 

T. C. 

Saturday Noon—Your second letter arrived also 
yesternight, again a most welcome messenger! It 
lay waiting me here, brought over by little Jane, as 
Jamie and I returned from a very still walk in the 
gloaming to Kirtlebridge where Jenny lives, whom 
we had found in the neatest of kitchens pacifically 
washing her youngest child under the blessed dusk 
of our all-encircling Heaven. Poor creatures, after 
all. 

You are always good to me, dear Goody, best 





190 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanfc 


Goody! Never two letters have done me more good 
than my acquisition for a week past. “Honble 
Mrs. Marshall” had honourably forwarded the 
first, franked by her own delicate hand. What a 
singular demi-quavering 0 La of sweet sensibility 
she is. I will explain more at large when we meet. 
Today I despatch her the Dumfries Courier for 
thanks and a sigh. No modified arrangement with 
any such concern would suit me the least in the 
world—yet if they had asked me to stay till Thursday 
I would cheerfully have done it, and had perhaps 
been nearer you today.—The invaluable inclosures 
did arrive in complete safety, much to the admiration 
of us all. It is strikingly recognizable; a smart little 
Goody (well worth some kisses, one would say)—tho ’ 
there is something too pincerish about the lips: and 
the expression of the petit nez retrousse is visibly 
exaggerated. Did you send one to your mother? 
Jack has despatched two of himself done by the same 
artist; the primness of his upper lip, an occasional 
character of him, is stereotyped there in a very con¬ 
spicuous manner; but perhaps it is better than could 
be expected. Now I will have done with the sunbeam 
too, and pay for it in hard money; wherefore if there 
be any good reason for the operation, pray set about 
it, and have the thing ready for me when I arrive.— 
By the way, I wrote two letters to Jack; directed, 
the first of them, No 23 (which was wrong), the 
second of them (aright) No 40, Porchester Terrace; 
perhaps as he flies so thro ’ the world neither of them 
has yet got to hand. 

We all laughed here at your adventure with the 
serene Ladyship and the sticks; I read that narrative 




Some IFUneteentb^dentur^ TKHriters 191 


for the general benefit. Proper, to give that high 
sailing female individual as good as she brought. 
It is vain for the like of her to come down to No 5—• 
thank Heaven, we have a Goody whom no gilt sticks 
need attempt to astonish; who sits, deaf as Alsa Crag, 
in the middle of all such charming. Well; what can 
we say but Allah akbar, Allah kerim —the all-wise 
great Creator makes many things, and has a certain 
never-failing mercy for them all! . . . 

Here at Scotsbrig, this day, things go somewhat 
better, with me at least, than yesterday. My mother 
too, tho’ she continues very weakly seems not to be 
worse, tho ’ they have kept her close in bed this morn¬ 
ing, the grey damp east-wind being far from genial. 
She is much quieter in mind, here in her own place; 
that sunny day was a lucky one for us to get her 
hither. Irabdea, really a discreet, delicate-minded 
woman, waits on us all with endless assiduity; an air 
of order and decorum, looking thro’ never such 
imperfection of equipment, is blessed and welcome 
to one. My shoes are polished (for example) into 
the express similitude of bright chivalry iron shoes; 
I dress in the other end room, where a toilet is spread 
with mathematical regularity, an abundant warm 
soft water is a real luxury to wash in. Best of all, 
I slept this morning till 8, I have had an hour added 
daily since I came, and am now got to this to day, 
in fact, I feel very considerably better. Silence, 
blessed silence! Only Will m Graham came tumbling 
in, yesterday afternoon, the formidablest bore now 
living; poor fellow, he was fast putting me into the 
bare move, when I gave Jamie his signal and we moved 
for Kirtlebridge. I have Herschell’s book of Natural 




i92 IRambles in autograph %ant> 


Science , very wise, dull, and commonplace; fit for 
a case like mine. Well let alone , alas, that is all that 
the wearied soul petitions for at present. . . . 

Annandale is largely mixed with melancholy and 
chagrin for me; yet it is one’s native soil,—impressive 
with the shadows of past years; sadder sometimes, 
yet with a composing sadness, than Hades itself 
need be! We shall see. I have written also to the 
Newcastle people to say what are the times of their 
steamers. Were this dull rooted headache (fruit of 
long bilious fret) which is daily fading out, once 
entirely faded I should be readier for most things.—- 
Adieu dear wifekin—I do love thee, know that always. 
Remember me to Darwin and the Whirlwind. Tell 
John to compose himself, and become capable of 
using his capabilities. Poor Helen shall make me 
coffee again before long. Write always. Adieu. 

T. Carlyle 

Envelope addressed 
Mrs. Carlyle— 

5 Cheyne Row, Chelsea, 

London. 

P. O. mark on back—April 24, 1841. 

Thackeray letters are always in demand and 
appear to increase in pecuniary value, even 
more than those of Dickens; possibly because 
Dickens wrote more letters and the supply is 
abundant. One of my Thackeray letters is 
particularly valuable to me because it con¬ 
tains examples of both of his styles of hand- 





/ 

7 - 


, 11 tu‘ . 




William Makepeace Thackeray 




Some IFUneteentb^Centur? TOlriters 193 


writing, the upright and the slanting, and also 
because it was written to Ainsworth, whom he 
was always depreciating and of whom he said 
and wrote disparaging and ill-natured things, 
as Mr. S. M. Ellis points out in his excellent 
and interesting book, William Harrison Ains¬ 
worth and His Friends , published in 1911. 
Whatever may be their respective merits as 
authors, Dickens had a more generous and 
lovable disposition than his mighty compeer. 
Ainsworth firmly believed that both of them 
•were his friends but Dickens never ridiculed 
him behind his back. In this letter Thackeray 
is referring to his lectures on “The Four 
Georges/ 1 

36 Onslow □, Jany 13, 1857. 

My dear Ainsworth— 

You ’ll think this correspondence is never a going 
to stop—and laugh when I tell you that here’s 
another put off!—only from 5 to 6:30 however, and 
I ’ll tell you why. Yesterday after my letter to you 
was despatched Mr. Beale came to me for 4 lectures 
at Brighton to be paid at the extremely moderate 
figure of 50 guineas per lecture (this is between our¬ 
selves). The only days we could give them are 
Wednesday, Thursday, Friday 24th at 3 o’clock, 
and I shall have to speak again in the evening here. 
Now this is the plan of campaign. We start from 


13 




i94 TRambles in autograph lant* 


Brighton by the 5 o’clock train. My servant is in 
waiting at the station to take our luggage. My 
(jobbed) Brougham whisks us off to Painters, Ship 
and Turtle, Leadenhall St., where a neat dinner awaits 
us, a bottle of East India particular and one of Claret. 
At 7.30 the Brougham takes us to Edward St., and 
at 9.25 whither we like first, and then home to this 
house where we all insist you must stop and sleep. 
And so for the present farewell, old friend. Who 
knows there may be Another letter yet? The Brigh¬ 
ton room may be engaged &c. &c. About these 
matters due notice shall be given, but on Saturday 
and Sunday 24-25, please the Lord, you dine with 
Yours always, 

W. M. Thackeray 

I find I write upright with the steel pen, slanting 
with the quill. 

Yet to this “old friend,” Thackeray was 
always unjust, according to Blanchard Jerrold, 
who adds: “He caricatured him unmercifully 
in Punch , and never lost an opportunity of 
being amusing at his expense.” 

Another letter of Thackeray was written 
to Fraser, the publisher, in regard to his con¬ 
tributions to Fraser's Magazine for 1839 
which were afterwards reprinted under the 
title of The Paris Sketch Book. The “im¬ 
promptu” is not strikingly brilliant. 




3b 0\u£n* D . %Uu^ 13. 


C (t^ £T^<U. cA-LU*4~U? 

It -4U Cirv-Ur* |uii.U Cc li 'ItA'c 4. ^rUi^ 

t ii(v^^ L*~u~^U U^Lu^ I 4-^c (L<J tiu*ALi< 

jwl »r^ *- 0iJb j £ k t> / 3 ^> [i^vL'd'K*. <xuJL | It \tll 


\\(u U.4-*^ Ulu*. iv lts& dnffMd**t4 
. ^ 4 / tc*uia^i cix* 6c*m* L { 


\<+'U 


I U/r 


<jru 

k W 4- bcU***, 

a.\ b znjbtsu k L. zX fW 

^ 'tu< ^ U^u-nr^i* tu.’i+cZva ) 

^ $<? Lttwu - Vu~ '&**\‘> kv CmuLL <j 

lku4^ ^T4 (w*kv*f*Lt<j 'JlucZS \^cX/^ ^aXi^HAaAy ~4 
* U<M , c b /(v^t' 

4^ 3 6 cKv& m ‘Xu^t U* tusu, * 

A ’ 

U>r 

k/u> tf Itx (iAsut 4^itv|u5u^| u * 4 jl&iA \uru 4 , 

b T^j l^LrU ^ "fki. $ 0 civc\> fz^xca. - <^(Uj String U U*- 

. 


First page of A. L. S. of William Makepeace Thackeray to William Harrison Ainsworth, 

January 13, 1857 








iitt AaXutu, b Xa\cc ?u*l ^ | Ar^c4^ 

lireu^b*4u uA^k *1* IlJ t P^UwltV A ~Tu*fcf£ 

\-a^c i>\-^c\ U'tu-'u, x (us*A ivt^^r 

►i- [♦'T^lk *^| *lsA4^ \luL~X jwt-*t(c£-<i.t*Ct. <Ztn{ Silt ^ cXfL'TC-^' , 

*-v( *|' Hd dfo ^ fe u>akJa . 0^4 

<d *j.2.£ lo-Lit&x- Ut kfc. Ou^t ftiA> L^rUiz “fc 

l^rt^r foe liuMt <j<*w: 4u*c*t /f>^ Ic, %Uczjs 4 

c,XuA |tT. ft* |cW-*W / liftu> “ 

Lc’c^r lu^ AMl 3 THEK bfc, yfflU bzajiLfu 

\lxr%nur U: d d . ^i-Wal X(kM-c \lud£vu 

Xut itAut JhxU. kt 4^\nu* Uu *? >ct ^twu 1 ^ 

-2.4- * |sXuctt Hot ImzA tjc^c Xtl\C Ltft 

^invvi cjut^y^ 


1 -M 1 <*& < +*‘i w ^ . [j/U^jCiWv - 

((u vi<^6 (v^h Urr« /& fu*// „ , v 


Last page of A. L. S. of William Makepeace Thackeray to William Harrison Ainsworth, 

January 13, 1857 



/S 




X**r /^rt*t^f 

4^r ■&****£** *y* / &*f - 

f^uy ****** *&** *& <Uc***£ '*&' *^*^**-*' 

S*za* Sr*y*yS yyf *2 a*a -^ynryt f^ '&M*c*f* 
^fw* ytZrust / ■*4' <fu***z*Z St**, 

^/Ifco'/' Ss *2u*6 

t^y-sLc^ Sae**** . ■f*****^- 

S?. ^Ek*^***^ * 


r^UfC 




/ 


, ms* ft*** srw* sZ**+S 4^4/ /****, 

Sam** f<«* t%ctt'/ c6**S sZ«J y*n* &t*r>. 


A. L. S. of William Makepeace Thackeray to James Fraser, July 1 [1833] 


































































Some 1PUneteentb=<Eentun> Winters 195 


19 Gt. Coram St. 1 July, [1839] 

Dear Fraser: 

Do make up my account now directly, if you owe 
me so much the better—I am hard up and want money, 
if you don’t, so much the better too, for you that is, 
and I shall know where I am. 

Sempitemally yours, 

W. M. Thackeray 
Impromptu 

In case you owe send what you owe 
In case you dont, dont send you know. 

The letters of Dickens, generally written 
in his favourite blue ink, are marked by much 
frank bonhomie and bear no evidence of la¬ 
boured effort to be striking or amusing, while 
Thackeray, to me at least, seems to be ever 
mindful of the fact that he is “Mr. Thackeray, 
the celebrated novelist.” One of them, which 
is among my pets, is not unfamiliar and it was 
printed in The Letters of Charles Dickens (ii., 
229-231), but parts of it are omitted in the 
published version. It is a graphic account 
of the terrible railway accident which occurred 
on June 9, 1865, at Staplehurst, a few miles 
south of Maidstone, due to negligence on the 
part of an employee. It was written to his 
old school-friend, Thomas Mitton. 





196 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


Gad’s Hill Place—Higham by Rocheste r, Kent— 
Tuesday thirteenth June, 1865— 

My dear Mitton, —I should have written to you 
yesterday or the day before, if I had been quite up 
to writing. I am a little shaken, not by the beating 
and dragging of the carriage in which I was, but by 
the hard work afterwards in getting out the dying 
and dead, which was most horrible. 

I was in the only carriage that did not go over into 
the stream. It was caught upon the turn by some 
of the ruin of the bridge, and hung suspended and 
balanced in an apparently impossible manner. Two 
ladies were my fellow-passengers, an old one and a 
young one. This is exactly what passed:—you may 
judge from it the precise length of the suspense. 
Suddenly we were off the rail and beating the ground 
as the car of a half emptied balloon might. The 
old lady cried out “My God!” and the young one 
screamed. I caught hold of them both (the old 
lady sat opposite, and the young one on my left), and 
said: “We can’t help ourselves, but we can be quiet 
and composed. Pray don’t cry out.” The old lady 
immediately answered, “Thank you. Rely upon 
me. Upon my soul, I will be quiet.” The young 
lady said in a frantic way, “Let us join hands and 
die friends.” We were then all tilted down together 
in a comer of the carriage, and stopped. I said to 
them thereupon: “You may be sure nothing worse 
can happen. Our danger must be over. Will you 
remain here without stirring, while I get out of the 
window?” They both answered quite collectedly, 
“Yes,” and I got out without the least notion what 
had happened. Fortunately I got out with great 






Charles Dickens 

From the etching by Hollyer 













v ^ /’*•' '** * Y ' ' * ' s'* ' * , 




•*. 


■■■#<**- 6 * C <v 

r ' / 

■%^*-r- v'- ' •* , . ~ 

i, v ‘ ‘ '* 4 •>:>. 


•-• . 

' fe 


/4 ^-f / i^L.-- 4t 4 


<!&ata $ill $lztt. 

$igf>aw i>g |l0ii)tstit,JKtnt. 




^v^: ; . 




r /** 
- 4 s V * 


•V ' < »* r. '• / 




* - f 

i \ <-* <j,/ »-££.. 


w' 


-.' a 21 


** vX 


• # , jr ~ -‘ *V4L — • 

H % y V t y t r * -- /' 

Cv ‘ At V* l^f % [ /ku 


W *V* rtA 


yi v^m i 


V 1 - -> • ^ , 

-r? v« Jr**< mi / *<<. */? 


/ 


/ 


'C 


<*<•»/,~C+ -V - «-, k. o/ k -‘(Co 
) , ■» 

ha *'* **''rtutuw* **~£.+u'+S 


'"■— - 7ZyKj > 

h ^ Wi 


|,.,A ; Y . ^,^-V 1 


/A -< /^4 


‘■‘—SA 


A ^ ^ 


A< 


K ' +*" /* :«i'sS 

' c,S“ W(U 

tv^ ^ 'U $ . /.. Z 

■4 ‘ , *?* y4 4^7 //4 

/Ci }/^yc^, At W, y/f/. 
y ~' t * S*4 •• ’J fe+y./* f Uv 4 




'■V 


First page of A. L. S. (4 pages) of Charles Dickens to Thomas Mitton, June 13, 1865 





































































Some 1 Flineteentb=(Eentur\> Writers 197 


caution and stood upon the step. Looking down, 
I saw the bridge gone and nothing below me but the 
line of rail. Some people in the two other compart¬ 
ments w r ere madly trying to plunge out at window, 
and had no idea that there was an open swampy 
field 15 feet down below them and nothing else! 
The two guards (one with his face cut) were running 
up and down on the down side of the bridge (which 
was not tom up) quite wildly. I called out to them 
4 4 Look at me. Do stop an instant and look at me, an d 
tell me whether you don’t know me.” One of them 
answered "We know you very well, Mr. Dickens.” 
44 Then” I said 44 my good fellow for God’s sake give 
me your key, and send one of those labourers here, 
and I ’ll empty this carriage”—We did it quite 
safely, by means of a plank or two and when it was 
done I saw all the rest of the train except the two 
baggage cars, down in the stream. I got into the 
carriage again for my brandy flask, took off my trav¬ 
elling hat for a basin, climbed down the brickwork, 
and filled my hat with water. Suddenly I came upon 
a staggering man covered with blood (I think he 
must have been flung clean out of his carriage) with 
such a frightful cut across the skull that I could n’t 
bear to look at him. I poured some water over his 
face, and gave him some to drink, and gave him some 
brandy, and laid him down on the grass, and he said 
44 1 am gone” and died afterwards. Then I stumbled 
over a lady lying on her back against a little pollard 
tree, with the blood streaming over her face (which 
was lead color) in a number of distinct little streams 
from the head. I asked her if she could swallow 
a little brandy, and she just nodded, and I gave her 






19S IRambles in autograph Xanb 


some and left her for somebody else. The next time 
I passed her, she was dead. Then a man examined 
at the Inquest yesterday (who evidently had not the 
least remembrance of what really passed) came 
running up to me and implored me to help him find 
his wife, who was afterwards found dead. No imagi¬ 
nation can conceive the ruin of the carriages, or the 
extraordinary weights under which the people were 
lying, or the complications into which they were 
twisted up among iron and wood, and mud and 
water. 

I don’t want to be examined at the Inquest, and 
I don’t want to write about it. It could do no good 
either way, and I could only seem to speak about 
myself, which of course I would rather not do. I am 
keeping very quiet here. I have a—I don’t know 
what to call it—constitutional (I suppose) presence 
of mind, and was not in the least fluttered at the 
time. I instantly remembered that I had the Ms. 
of a N 0, with me, and clambered back into the carriage 
for it. But in writing these scanty words of recol¬ 
lection I feel the shake and am obliged to stop. 

Ever faithfully, 

C. D. 

Dickens received no injury, but he never 
recovered from the nervous shock and often 
referred in later years to the effect upon his 
system. Every Dickens lover will remember 
what he says of it in the postscript to Our 
Mutual Friend: 




Some 1Rineteentb*=Centun> Mriters 199 


On Friday the Ninth of June in the present year, 
Mr. and Mrs. Boffin (in their manuscript dress of 
receiving Mr. and Mrs. Lammle at breakfast) were 
on the South-Eastern Railway with me, in a terri¬ 
bly destructive accident. When I had done what I 
could to help others, I climbed back into my carriage— 
nearly turned over a viaduct; and caught aslant upon 
the turn—to extricate the worthy couple. They were 
much soiled, but otherwise unhurt. The same happy 
result attended Miss Bella Wilfer on her wedding 
day, and Mr. Riderhood inspecting Bradley Head¬ 
stone’s red neckerchief as he lay asleep. I remember 
with devout thankfulness that I can never be much 
nearer parting company with my readers for ever, 
than I was then, until there shall be written against 
my life the two words with which I have this day 
closed this book:—THE END.” 

Strangely enough the postscript quoted 
was criticised with severity. In the West¬ 
minster Review of April, 1866, it was dealt 
with in this savage fashion: 

We believe that all England would have been 
deeply shocked had Mr. Dickens been killed in the 
Staplehurst accident. But many minds will be 
equally shocked by the melodramatic way in which 
he speaks of his escape. Those who are curious to 
understand the tricks of his style should analyse 
the last section. He first endeavours to raise a joke 
about Mr. and Mrs. Lammle, “in their manuscript 
dress,” and his other fictitious characters being 




200 IRambles in Hutograpb Hant> 


rescued from the railway carriage, and then turns 
off to moralise and improve upon his own escape, 
concluding the whole with a theatrical tag about 
“The End,” which refers both to the conclusion of 
the book and his life. We write this in no carping 
spirit, but because it so fully explains to us the cause 
of Mr. Dickens’s failures—a want of sincerity, and a 
determination to raise either a laugh or a tear at the 
expense of the most sacred of things. 

The mind that could conceive that comment 
must have been a curious one; fancy the 
mental condition of a man who was as much 
shocked by what he thought a blunder in 
taste as by the sudden and violent death of a 
fellow-creature! 

A very pleasant book is the Life of Shirley 
Brooks by G. S. Layard, called “A Great 
Punch Editor.” In 1856 “ Shirley was now 
a sufficiently imposing figure in the literary 
world to attract the attention of the autograph 
hunters,” Mr. Layard informs us, and he 
gives a letter from Horace Mayhew with an 
endorsement by Brooks in which the latter 
remarks: “What would the world give for 
two such hautographs?” In the Life is 
quoted this to a Mr. W. H. Doeg: 



Some 1Rineteentb=Centiin> Mriters 201 


The Temple. 

Oct. 22nd, 1858. 

Dear Sir: 

I am not a “distinguished man” but the distin¬ 
guished service which you did in the days of Saul, 
commemorated in the 18th verse of the 22d chapter 
of the first book of Samuel, precludes me from diso¬ 
beying your desire. 

I am, dear Sir, 

Your obedient servant, 

Shirley Brooks 

Mr. Doeg. 

Edom &c. &c. 


The reference is to Doeg the Edomite who 
“fell upon the priests and slew . . . fourscore 
and five persons that did wear the linen 
ephod.” Later, it seems, attacks from auto¬ 
graph seekers “became something of a nui¬ 
sance, but he could never find it in his heart 
to refuse their flattering, though troublesome 
demands.’’ In his Diary for 1871 Brooks 
made an entry which his biographer says 
“carries a wholesome lesson with it”: 


Somebody, Algernon O. Simon, London University, 
no, University College, writes for an autograph, but 
sends no envelope. Told him he owed me a penny, 
and was to pay it to the first ragged child he saw. 




202 IRambles in Hutograpb Xant> 


Layard regards this as “a model reply to 
the autograph hunter”: 


Regent’s Park. 
Whit Tuesday, 1864. 


Sir: 

I am happy to hear that I have so many good 
qualities, as you assign to me, and I am, in addition, 


Your obedient servant, 
Shirley Brooks 


A. Vogue Esq. 


One of my letters of Brooks is addressed 
to “Artemus Ward Esq.” which the editor 
evidently thought was the real name of his 
new contributor. Mr. Layard tells us that 
“Ward” was one of the eighteen guests “at 
Shirley’s hospitable board” on New Year’s 
Eve, 1866 ,—seven months or so earlier than the 
date of this letter,—and proposed the health 
of his host in a characteristic speech; but this 
means of course the eve of New Year, 1867, 
as “Ward” did not reach England until June, 
1866. The letter indicates that “Ward’s” 
articles were at first not quite dull enough for 
Punch; and this is confirmed by what Brooks 
wrote to Frith, the artist, in September, 1866, 
saying, “I believe he [A. W.] sent in a contribu- 




Some 1Rineteentb=Centiui> Writers 203 


tion on some topic which Mark the Large 
[Lemon] thought would not be acceptable to 
the B. P. I have no reason to suppose that the 
series will be discontinued. But I don’t know, 
and I don’t care, which is more.” But later 
the British Public, which is not always swift 
of judgment in matters of humour, “caught on 
to” Charles Farrar Browne, who, although he, 
died in March, 1867, won a fame in England 
which almost surpassed that which he enjoyed 
in his own country. 

6 Kent Terrace Regent’s Park, N. W. 

Aug 27, 1866. 

My dear sir: 

I have not had (but hope for) the pleasure of making 
your personal acquaintance, but this being a business 
communication will need no apology. I am in charge 
of Punch during Mr. Mark Lemon’s absence in France, 
& of course your MS came to me, and went from me 
to the printer. Your article appears in the new 
number—I enclose you the page, and the publication 
itself will be duly forwarded. If it suits you to send 
in “ copy ” by Thursday, there will be time for you to 
see your own proofs. I may just mention that you 
will see a word or two, in the first paragraph, not 
exactly as in M. S. an alteration made necessary by 
our finding it expedient never to kill babies out & 
out for the readers of Punch, an insular weakness for 
which you will make allowance. I expect Mr. Lemon 



204 IRambles in Hutograpb lanb 


at the end of the week, and I shall probably have the 
pleasure of calling on you with him. 

Believe me, my dear Sir, 

Yours very truly, 
Shirley Brooks. 

Artemus Ward Esq. 

Buckle’s History of Civilisation was once 
much talked about, but its fame might have 
been more enduring if he had written it in a 
much earlier time or in a much later time. 
This autobiographical letter is of interest 
chiefly because it convicts the accurate Sir 
Leslie Stephen of a slight error in his sketch in 
the Dictionary of National Biography , where 
the date of Buckle’s birth is given as November 
24, 1821. 


London, 30 April 1861— 

59 Oxford Terrace, W. 

Sir— 

In answer to your letter, I beg to state that I was 
born on 24th November 1822. I have written nothing 
except the first volume of a History of Civilization; 
an Essay on the Influence of Women; and an Essay 
on Liberty. The two last were published with my 
name in Frasers Magazine. I have neither appoint¬ 
ments nor preferments; nor are my opinions such as 
to make it probable that I shall obtain any, even 
supposing that I wished for them. My father was a 
merchant in the city of London. My mother was 



Some 1Rineteentb<*(Eentur\> Mriters 205 


a Miss Middleton belonging to the Yorkshire family 
of that name. 

Should you require further information, I shall be 
happy to supply you with it. 

I have the honour to be, 

Sir, 

Yours obediently, 

Henry Thomas Buckle 

I ought perhaps to have mentioned that the Essay on 
the Influence of Women was originally delivered as 
a Lecture at the Royal Institution in 1858. 


This letter of Frederick Locker-Lampson 
is given because it supplies a new idea of a 
device to check the collecting habit when one 
is conscious that it is becoming oppressive. 


New Haven Court. 
Cromer, 21 Sept. 

Sir— 

Thank you for y r letter of the 18. I printed my 
Catalogue to make an end of my collecting, so you 
see it wd never do to think of yr proposal, however 
much I might be tempted. 

Yrs, 


F. L. L. 


I doubt the efficacy of the remedy. I tried it 
myself once and it failed miserably. The printed 
list only made me see more clearly the gaps in 
the Collection. But it was a good excuse for 
Lampson to get rid of an undesirable applicant. 




CHAPTER XI 

A GROUP OF ENGLISH STATESMEN 


Some English Statesmen—Cobden’s letter to W. H. Osborn— 
Bright’s letter to Greeley—Letters of Robert Lowe, Lord 
Sherbrooke—Sir Stafford Northcote to Cyrus W. Field- 
Lord Chancellors—Atlay’s Victorian Chancellors—Eldon — 
Lyndhurst—Sugden to Brougham— Cranworth—Westbury 
—Campbell—Hatherly. 


Two modem English statesmen must always 
be especially dear to Americans with mem¬ 
ories, for they were our friends when we most 
needed staunch friendship and their country¬ 
men—at least those of the ruling class—were 
by no means favourably disposed towards us. 
Richard Cobden and John Bright—I call 
them “modern,’’ although nothing is deemed 
to be modern now which is more than five 
years old—were champions of the cause against 
the enemies of the American Union. 

Cobden, the great Freetrader and anti-com- 
206 



Richard Cobden 

From the engraving by Hollyer after a photograph by W. & D. Downey 




























* 


























































































H ©roup of lEncjlteb Statesmen 207 


law Radical, was such an admirer of the United 
States that he was accused of scheming to 
Americanise English institutions. An easy, 
accomplished, and convincing speaker, al¬ 
though not an orator of the order of Bright 
and Gladstone, he did not appeal to the 
passions of men but to their higher and nobler 
feelings. He knew America well and was 
fully qualified to arrive at sound opinions 
about our affairs. Justin McCarthy says: 

In the time of the Civil War his whole sympathy 
•went with the cause of the North, just as Palmerston’s 
sympathies went with the cause of the South, but 
Cobden’s cool judgment was never likely to be over¬ 
borne by his sympathies, and he was able to make 
quiet comparison of the forces arrayed on either side. 
Cobden was convinced that the Federal States were 
destined to be the victors; Palmerston took it for 
granted that the Federal States were sure to be the 
vanquished. 

Cobden was heartily detested by the old 
Conservatives, who thought that his opinions 
were destructive and revolutionary. What 
would they now think of Lloyd George? 

This letter, written by Cobden to Mr. W. H. 
Osborn, formerly President of the Illinois 




208 IRambles in autograpb Xant> 


Central Railroad, was given to me by that 
gentleman’s son, Mr. William Church Osborn. 
The views it expresses about paper money 
have come to be generally accepted but it 
needed a long campaign of education to con¬ 
vince the American voters of their soundness. 

Midhurst, 18 Feby. 1864. 

My dear Mr. Osborn— 

I have not yet been to London to take my seat in 
the House this session. The weather is cold, night 
work does not suit me at this season of the year, & 
there is nothing particular coming on early. On the 
whole, I have passed through the winter very well 
& am better than usual. 

Mr. Cyrus Field writes to tell me that he is the 
bearer of the book you were so kind as to send for 
my daughter Nellie. It has not yet reached us, but 
she begs me to thank you in advance for what she is 
sure is a beautiful present. 

The diplomatic correspondence between our coun¬ 
tries has been published, & the result is I hope 
to show that we are safe for the present from the 
breakers. There is nothing at issue between the two 
countries which will not keep. All parties here join 
in awarding praise to Mr. Adams for the ability, 
discretion, & temper with which he conducted his very 
difficult diplomacy during the last year. I am not 
disposed to criticise Lord Russell. I am satisfied 
with the result. 

You allude in your letter to the prosperity of your 



top/fzz^ , <*, /r^*^+~~i 


£ -^r ) *e« .f</^ 

«**. t* 

W>*«**^ , *1 ?Utt - > 'T^ «*. ^ rr **^*i ?» 

•jgztisstzz *? <*=>-- >■ 

z *r/ 


J 


tb; &*Z~£y << ^ 

z-Tpu^*- ^b.^, 

^ ^ ^ 

-— jU/ /JU f f** * 1 


^ ^ g>^-- rwi-Mr^ 

*** ft****’ , 

**a^JL ^ Tf 1 ^ 


^ L>^r~ *~<- «- 

^ ^ 7 € c ^ 

1-*‘rhlZf?^ 


Last page of A. L. S. (4 pages) of Richard Cobden, February 18, 1864 



















a (Sroup of English Statesmen 209 


finances. I am sorry there is nobody to tell the 
parties the plain truths. You are producing less 
in consequence of the war, & are spending through 
the government for unproductive purposes an un¬ 
paralleled amount. Now, if the people in their 
individual capacities were living on short rations, & 
spending less on their clothing & other outlays, they 
might by their restricting their expenses save as much 
as would meet the government wastes, & thus, by 
anticipating the effects of the war, avert a great 
future privation & difficulty. But the effects of the 
paper money operating like alcohol on the human 
system, & producing an excitement on the body 
politic which like the stimulus of strong drink, though 
it imparts an artificial energy for the moment, is sure 
to leave a corresponding prostration at the end. We 
read glowing accounts of the prosperity of the country 
& the extravagance of your great cities. Nobody 
seems prepared for the revulsion which must follow. 
I am afraid of the consequences on your politics & 
almost your institutions. If you have to encounter 
a high price of food it will prove a most serious & 
unmanageable element in your national finances. I 
am afraid you will consider me a croaker. 

My wife & family join me in kind remembrances 
to Mrs. Osborn & the good wishes of the Sturgis 
& believe me yours truly, 

R. COBDEN 

Peel thought that John Bright was a more 
single-minded man than Cobden and that he 
had done what he did for the repeal of the 


14 



2io Gambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


corn duty for the sake of the people and not 
for his own. Lord Ellenborough (the son of 
the Chief Justice) said of the two men: “I 
confess I think they were both unsuited to the 
present constitution of the country, and that 
they had a strange longing for something more 
on the American model.” That seemed to 
the aged Tory a grave accusation, but some¬ 
how we cannot look upon it with the horror 
expected of us. One’s imagination falters in 
the attempt to fancy old Ellenborough’s 
feelings if he had lived to contemplate the 
political condition of England to-day. 

This letter of Bright to Horace Greeley was 
printed, of course, in the Tribune shortly 
after its receipt. Even to a man who sup¬ 
ported McClellan in 1864 it appears to be a 
wise and certainly a friendly one. 

Rochdale, Oct r 1, 1864. 

Dear Sir:— 

For more than three years the people of this country 
have watched with a constant interest, the progress 
of the great conflict in which your people have been 
engaged, and, as you know, some have rejoiced over 
the temporary successes of the enemies of your Govt, 
and some have deeply lamented them. 




t 


si - 



John Bright 


















































































































* 



































































H ©roup of English Statesmen 211 


At this moment we turn our eyes rather to the 
political than to the military struggle, and there is with 
us the same difference of opinion & of sympathy as re¬ 
gards your coming Presidential Election that has been 
manifested in connexion with your contest in the field. 

All those of my countrymen who have wished well 
to the rebellion, who have hoped for the break-up 
of your Union, who have preferred to see a Southern 
Slave Empire rather than a restored & free Republic, 
so far as I can observe, are now in favor of the election 
of General McClellan. All those who have deplored 
the calamities which the leaders of Secession have 
brought upon your country—who believe that slavery 
weakens your power & tarnishes your good name 
throughout the world, & who regard the restoration 
of your Union as a thing to be desired & prayed for 
by all good men, so far as I can judge, are heartily 
longing for the re-election of Mr. Lincoln. Every 
friend of your Union probably, in Europe—every 
speaker & writer who has sought to do justice to your 
cause since the war began, is now hoping with an 
intense anxiety that Mr. Lincoln may be placed at 
the head of your Executive for another term. 

It is not because they believe Mr. Lincoln to be 
wiser or better than all other men in your Continent 
—but they think they have observed in his career 
a grand simplicity of purpose & a patriotism which 
knows no change, & which does not falter. To some 
of his countrymen there may appear to have been 
errors in his course. It would be strange indeed if 
in the midst of difficulties so stupendous & so unex¬ 
pected, any administration or any Ruler should wholly 
avoid mistakes. To us looking on from this distance 




2i2 IRambles in autograph Xant> 


and unmoved by the passions from which many 
of your People can hardly be expected to be free,— 
regarding his Presidential path with the calm judg¬ 
ment which belongs rather to History than to the 
present time, as our outside position enables us, in 
some degree, to regard it,—we see in it an honest 
endeavor faithfully to do the work of his great office, 
and in the doing of it a brightness of personal honor 
on which no adversary has yet been able to fix a stain. 

I believe that the effect of Mr. Lincoln’s re-election 
in England & in Europe, & indeed throughout the 
world, will be this—it will convince all men that 
the integrity of your great country will be preserved 
& it will show that Republican Institutions with an 
instructed and patriotic people can bear a nation safely 
& steadily through the most desperate perils. 

I am one of your friends in England who have never 
lost faith in your cause. I have spoken to my country¬ 
men on its behalf, & now in writing this letter to you 
I believe I speak the sentiments & the heart’s wish 
of every man in England who hopes for the freedom 
& greatness of your country. Forgive me for this 
intrusion upon you, but I cannot hold back from 
telling you what is passing in my mind & I wish if 
possible to send you a word of encouragement. 

Believe me always with great respect, 

Yours very truly, 
John Bright 

Horace Greeley Esq. 

New York— U. S. 


Even in England, few now remember 
Robert Lowe, Viscount Sherbrooke, although 




t y -/ 

/U9 > ^' in' 




fr'/y 


A-0*. // ■ c . 

^ ^ZT>^ ^ ^ 

c^<». £%aj /CjZas^ Z-ya^Z/^a.<£* Sty-&. A. Zst<s?4&<a~S~ Zc*.^ 4~£-*/y 

J • ,/^( 

&t+./6.c/~ Zu 2*4^ /u^i£^ 4 jU^ . 

\ ^ 2> x ^~ ^«SU/ •L*?'L^A- fa i— 

/H^ ~%A. flZ*. 

/>V A 'fee*. 

^ £+J&*. 4'7/fa 

/./A.'AUcJL &U. 4-Zfa /u^JtLy, S/C^ffZZ, &ZZa> 

«.; tJ/cru^ &.~7<u~*- ‘V*^^ * / 

^yU>4£, <* <ya^ 2*u~ Ou^<*y <?U*i Pt*/*/ /6 *j£L, 

jfcf^La* 6u*~ 1*£<S fai *i+Jtt~gruu& 

£j^&,/' ^ 4x. jfLA*£/£* • 

a& /£**. f^y ^ 

tu£. A"A (Ac/t-/- *&• ^A 5 ~fc- / ^ c *Z' c iZ 

£*~ /U*2i*.,. Ai *■*♦» ^ ^ A J ‘ /U ^ l/V< ^ 

^ ^ ^ - ***^ ^ 

*/** ✓**. y* ^ 

ffa+Jt,&X*A*~ • ^ ^ 

>** ^ 


First page of A. L. S. (4 pages) of John Bright to Horace Greeley, October 1, 1864 







\ 


^ / 

C< tAa. /t^CoA. yf 4^ ^H/2^ C^. £<4 uO 

jirfuLi fr\ ?£c /}jU.jCn^ PL ^T'^C . 


Avy 4va. Aaj*_ /^I &^As-<S? t ,rT^. 


/ 


Out**,/' /CnfV />*- ^ ^ 

^ Au.lL* * / /UnOrt^ 

\Lt « ^ t *V''£*C<) ^ 


/{ £^T7 /tA^» 



V 


Last page of A. L. S. (4 pages) of John Bright to Horace Greeley, October 1, 1864 







a (Stroup of JEngltsb Statesmen 213 


he was more brilliant than either Bright or 
Cobden. “ It requires,” says Mr. Bryce, “ an 
effort to believe that he was at one time held 
the equal in oratory and the superior in in¬ 
tellect of Mr. Bright and Mr. Gladstone.” 
But he had disappeared from the minds of 
men when, in 1892, in his eighty-second year, 
he passed out of life. With all his great 
powers of mind, he was not well fitted for 
leadership, and he had neither the disposition 
nor the ability to coax, flatter, and humour 
u the masses.” He was persistently hostile 
to Disraeli, and was the one man in London 
with whom that strange semi-Oriental per¬ 
sonage “would not shake hands.” He said 
of Disraeli that “English was, after all, his 
native language.” This letter, written to a 
friend in 1876, is in some degree expressive of 
his sentiments. 


Sherbrooke, Caterham. 

Sept. 27, ’76. 

My dear James— 

I am glad you approve. I am much grieved at 
Dizzy for saying that the great mass of opinion in 
England is against his policy and that he means to 
adhere to it. As they say in America—That’s not 





2i4 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


democratic. I am also afflicted to think that we 
submit to such treatment and that the policy of the 
Nation is to depend not on the will of the Nation but on 
the will of one Israelite in whom there is much guile. 

Believe me— 

Very truly yours, 

Robert Lowe 

His speeches were full of sarcasm. Justin 
McCarthy in his Portraits of the Sixties com¬ 
pares Lowe’s satirical style with that of Lord 
Westbury, asserting that while Lowe was 
effective, he was not quite as effective as 
Richard Bethell. I quote: 

He jibed and jeered at his opponents in rasping tones 
suited to the words. The listener was amused and 
delighted but never surprised. Lowe was going in 
avowedly and obviously for making his antagonists 
feel uncomfortable and angry. The tone, the man¬ 
ner, the glances, and the gestures were all in keeping 
with that kind of purpose. There was no charm of 
surprise or contrast about it. 

During the pendency of the Gladstone 
Reform Bill of 1866 he wrote as follows: 

36 Lowndes Square. 

March 26, 1866. 

My Dear Melville:— 

I cannot tell what the effect of Gladstone’s speech 
will be on the public, but I know what effect it ought 
to have on members of Parliament. It is a simple 




H ®roup of English Statesmen 215 


avowal that finding statistics against him he throws 
them aside and relies on our common humanity and 
Christianity principles which have at least the ad¬ 
vantage of being independant of figures. There is 
no profit in trying to prove the real meaning of the 
Bill. It stands confessed as an attempt to effect 
a complete change of Political Power from Education 
to Ignorance, from Property to poverty. Those who 
pay the taxes will not impose them, those who impose 
them will not pay them. Free Trade is to be handed 
over to people notoriously inclined to protection, 
Peace to people ever ready to go to war for an idea 
and Individual liberty to people who tolerate no 
difference of opinion from their own. Lord Grosvenor 
is threatened with the loss of his estate, the House 
of Commons with physical force and the rest of us 
are bespattered with the coarsest abuse while no 
attempt is made to answer our arguments. 

It is very hard that I who possess so very small 
a stake in this land should have to fight this battle 
against the very men who will be the first victims of 
the coming change. 

People long for land just as much here as in America, 
only there the longing can be satisfied without an 
agrarian Law—here it cannot. Property exists here 
because we are able to curb the majority but give 
them the power of government and who shall curb 
them then? People seem to forget that they can be 
just as effectually robbed by Law as by violence and 
that the whole question is, who are to make the Laws. 

Believe me always, 

Very sincerely yours, 

R. Lowe 





216 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


He opposed the Gladstone bill with great 
force and ability, and was one of the so-called 
“ Adullanlites , ’ who seceded from the Liberals 
on that issue. It is conceded that his speeches 
contributed more to its defeat than any other 
cause. Yet, strange to say, the result was 
the reverse of what he most longed to accom¬ 
plish. The bill of 1866 was mild in comparison 
with that of 1867, which was carried by the 
Tories “beguiled by Mr. Disraeli.'* “Thus,” 
says Bryce, “Robert Lowe as much as Dis¬ 
raeli and Gladstone may in a sense be called 
an author of the tremendous change which 
has passed upon the British Constitution since 
1866.” 

“Well, we must educate our masters,” 
said Lowe after the bill had become a law. 
His prophecies of the ultimate effect of 
the extension of the suffrage were far 
too gloomy, thought Mr. Bryce in 1903; 
but much has occurred since 1903 to con¬ 
vince us that the evils he predicted were 
not fanciful. He was no believer in the 
“democracy” falsely so called, preached by 
the demagogues. 




H (Sronp of English Statesmen 217 


We were warned fifty years ago, [writes Mr. G. 
W. E. Russell in 1901] to remember that democracy 
means a government, not merely by numbers of 
isolated individuals, but by a demos —by men accus¬ 
tomed to live in demoi , or corporate bodies, and 
accustomed, therefore, to the self-control, obedience 
to law, and self-sacrificing public spirit without 
which a corporate body cannot exist. “A democracy 
of mere numbers is no democracy, but a mere brute 
‘arithmocracy,’ which is certain to degenerate into an 
‘othlocracy,’ [sic] or government by the mob, in which 
the members have no real share; and oligarchy of 
the fiercest, the noisiest, the rashest, and the most 
shameless, which is surely swallowed up, either by 
a despotism, as in France, or, as in Athens, by 
utter national ruin and hopeless slavery to a foreign 
invader.” 

When Sir Stafford Northcote, a scholarly 
and clear-minded statesman, came to the 
United States in 1871 with the Marquis 
of Ripon and Professor Montague Bernard 
to arrange for the settlement of the Alabama 
Claims question, a banquet was given to 
the Commission by Cyrus W. Field; and 
years later, Field, never unmindful of his 
own great services in the matter of the 
Atlantic Cable, applied to Northcote—then 
Lord Iddesleigh—for his views on the value 





218 IRambles in Hutograpb Uanb 


of the cable in the negotiations for arbitration. 
Northcote made this rather cautious but very 
sensible reply: 


Osborne— 

July 23, 1885. 

Dear Mr. Field:— 

I am truly sorry that an engagement of very long 
standing prevents my attending your dinner on the 
5th August. 

You ask me whether we found the Atlantic Cable 
of use during the Washington negotiations. There 
can be no doubt that it was a main agent in the 
matter. We usually met our American colleagues 
at midday, and we were by that time in possession 
of the views of our Home Government as adopted 
at their Cabinet in the afternoon of the same day. 
I am sometimes heretic enough to doubt whether 
such very rapid and constant communication is of 
unmixed advantage in the conduct of a negotiation; 
but undoubtedly there are frequently occasions when 
it is almost essential to have the means of exchanging 
ideas with only a few minutes’ or at most a few hours’ 
delay instead of at intervals of weeks. 

Believe me, 

Yours faithfully, 

Iddesleigh 

Cyrus W. Field Esq. 

Sir Stafford was fortunate in having Andrew 
Lang for his biographer. Lang tells us that 
in the negotiations in Washington the English 




a ©roup of lEnglieb Statesmen 219 


were fighting a triangular or even a quad¬ 
rilateral duel, for they had to hold their own 
not only with the Americans, but with the 
Home Government and the representative 
of Canada. He adds this Langian touch: 
“The Home Government kept putting in 
their oar, and once—for which much may 
by literary persons be forgiven them—they 
telegraphed that, in the treaty, they would 
not endure adverbs between 'to’ (the sign 
of the infinitive) and the verb. The purity 
of the English language they nobly and 
courageously defended. ’ ’ This may have been 
one of the reasons why Sir Stafford did not 
regard the cable as an unmixed blessing. 

Northcote was “too sweetly reasonable” 
to become a great leader. So optimistic 
was his disposition that one of his supporters 
cried out, “Hang that fellow Northcote! he s 
always seeing blue sky!” He was not one 
of that sort of leader so common of late who 
first convince the public that everything is 
wrong, and then that they are the only per¬ 
sons who can set everything right. 

The lives of the Lord Chancellors of England 




220 IRambles in Butoorapb Xanb 


may not afford to the general reader as much 
interest as those of kings and warriors, but 
to lawyers and to students of English legal 
and political history they are full of fascina¬ 
tion. Lord Campbell, however untrust¬ 
worthy he may be as an historian, deserves 
our gratitude for giving to the world the 
biographies of the Chancellors from the earliest 
times to the days of Lyndhurst and Brougham; 
his failings, particularly those displayed in 
his sketches of the two last mentioned Chancel¬ 
lors, are so well understood that an intelli¬ 
gent reader is not likely to be misled by them, 
and he will find them undeniably entertaining. 

The work of Mr. J. B. Atlay (The Victorian 
Chancellors) is of a different order, and while 
it is entertaining it is devoid of the appearance 
of personal or partisan prejudice. Prepared 
according to the methods of modern bio¬ 
graphy, it betrays no bias and gives us assur¬ 
ance of the author’s fairness and freedom 
from petty jealousies or antipathies. He is 
careful to say that his undertaking “makes 
no claim to be regarded as a continuation” 
of Campbell’s series. He treats of the thir- 




H ©roup of English Statesmen 221 


teen Chancellors who occupied the woolsack 
between 1837 and 1901, and adds Brougham, 
not technically a Victorian Chancellor, be¬ 
cause of his intimate connection with the 
fortunes of his successors and with the affairs 
of the Victorian period. Of the subjects 
of these biographies the greater number were 
extraordinary men physically as well as 
intellectually; their longevity has been a 
frequent cause of comment. Most of them 
were laborious in the extreme, but their 
mental toil seems to have acted as a preserva¬ 
tive. St. Leonards (Sugden), perhaps the 
most learned of them all, lived to be ninety- 
two; Lyndhurst, the most brilliant, to be 
ninety-one; Brougham, the most versatile, 
to be eighty-nine; Chelmsford to be eighty- 
four, Selbome to be eighty-two, and Halsbury 
still survives (1912), vigorous at eighty-seven. 
Cottenham died at seventy, Truro and 
Westbury at seventy-three, Cranworth at 
seventy-seven, Hatherly at nearly eighty, and 
Campbell at eighty-one. Cairns and Herschell 
were the youngest, the former dying at sixty- 
four and the latter at sixty-one, but Cairns 




222 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


early developed the seeds of consumption and 
Herschell was the victim of an unfortunate 
accident while visiting the United States. 
In length of service, Lord Halsbury leads 
them all with a total of seventeen years, and 
St. Leonards had the shortest tenure, only 
about ten months. 

My Eldon autographs are mostly official. 
This letter must have been written in 1816, 
as that was the year when Abbott (afterwards 
Lord Tenterden) was appointed a puisne 
Judge of the Common Pleas. 

My dear Lord:- 

I have not got the Prince’s consent, nor his War¬ 
rant, of Com 11 for H. I appointed Abbott two days 
ago to be sworn in tomorrow—Ser 1 and Judge—& 
I presume his Society, himself &c. are all prepared.— 
I really do not know, now, how to interfere.—I was 
ignorant of the fact of seniority at the bar, the 
appointment of Abbott having been first certified 
to him & even before Dampier’s death. I do not 
think that, on account of the mere seniority at the 
bar, I can, in the actual circumstances, interpose, 
now, to make his, the first notified appointment, the 
latter in order. That seems very awkward, and tho’ 
I regret this thing about the seniority, I feel it that 
it would be very uncomfortable to intimate to Abbott 
that that, which is in substance the first appointment, 




a (Broup of English Statesmen 223 


should now be converted into the second. I dont 
know how to propose it to A. after what has passed. 
I hope tomorrow will bring me some answer from the 
Prince, but I am by no means, after what I have 
heard today, sure of it. 

Yrs most truly, 

Eldon 

I am just this moment come home. 

Brougham wrote many letters and my 
examples are numerous, but none of them 
possess much interest. His handwriting was 
atrocious. A writer in the Spectator says: 

Charles Knight describes the undignified rush of Lord 
Chancellor Brougham from his robing room to the 
woolsack with grave officials puffing scandalised after 
him. The characteristics of Brougham’s handwriting, 
as we see it here, are just the same; it is a hasty, dash¬ 
ing scrawl, the words have been thrown at the paper, 
instead of being written upon it, and have stuck there 
as they best could without assistance. 

Lord Cottenham also wrote an abominable 
hand; Lyndhurst’s is more legible. This ex¬ 
tract from a manuscript opinion illustrates the 
natural disposition of a lawyer (which lay¬ 
men consider to be so reprehensible) to advise 
a client less with reference to the merits of 
the controversy than to the chances of win¬ 
ning the cause. 




224 TRambles in autograph Xanb 


I am for the reasons above given clearly of opinion 
that the Deft, ought not to demur, and as to the plea 
of non est factum, I think it not improbable that it 
will be proved at the trial (& the Deft has no evidence 
to the contrary) that the alteration was made before 
the execution of the Bond. In fact the deft, in this 
respect seems to be completely in the power of Brit¬ 
tain. There is therefore considerable hazard in 
defending the action, and I think it by much the most 
prudent course to settle it by payment of the debt 
and costs. 

J. Copley 

Temple, Deer 23, 1815— 

Sugden was a great lawyer but he did not 
always study his briefs, and on one occasion 
in the Vice-Chancellor’s Court he argued one 
side of a case before he found out that he had 
been retained and briefed by the other side. 
It was Sugden who made the famous remark 
about Brougham, that if he only knew a 
little law he would know a little of every¬ 
thing. His legal writings, especially his 
treatise on the Law of Vendors and Purchasers, 
have always been considered of the highest 
authority, although Mr. Bryce said that they 
were “a mere accumulation of details un¬ 
illumined and unrelieved by any statement 
of general principles, and that, in literary 




a (Broup of English Statesmen 225 


style no less than in the cast and quality of 
his intellect, he is hard and crabbed.” 

When he died his will could not be found 
although the eight codicils were safe in his 
tin-box. Thereupon a thing thitherto un¬ 
heard of happened: the court allowed the 
contents of the lost will to be proved by the 
oral testimony of the daughter. 

This letter, written when he was Chancellor, 
shows the interest he felt in the improvement 
of the Chancery Court. Bellenden Ker, of 
• whom he speaks, was a prominent law reformer. 
Although his term of office was brief, Sugden 
succeeded in procuring the passage of his 
bills for the amendment of chancery and 
common-law procedure. 


Boyle Farm— 

4th Sept. 1852. 

My dear Lord Brougham : 

I was in possession of Bellenden Ker’s paper and 
of the substance of your correspondence with Lynd- 
hurst when all the other papers were under my re¬ 
view. I readily adopt your suggestion to commence 
with “offences against the person.” Lyndhurst has 
given me the same advice altho’ on different grounds. 

Your other suggestions have not been lost sight 
of. I have had the subject of the County Courts 
is 



226 Gambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


& of the Bankruptcy Courts repeatedly under con¬ 
sideration. I am sorry to say that I have taken a 
view of the subjects which does not altogether agree 
with yours although as we have the same object in 
view it is not I hope likely that we should ultimately 
disagree and I need not assure you how much value I 
set upon your opinion. Indeed both of the Courts 
may be said to be entitled [sic] to you for their 
creation. 

I have offered All Saints & St. Julian's, Norwich, 
(230 1 a year without a House) to your friend Mr. 
Gurney. He has not as you supposed thrown up 
his small living and had to pay for dilapidations but 
he retains it and being there without a House has 
obtained the consent of the Bishop & myself to the 
erection of a House. However I hope this living 
will suit him better. 

The living of All Saints has come to the Crown by 
lapse and the incumbent is an immoral person who 
is rejected by his Parishioners & the Bishop and 
forced to live abroad so that it is quite right to fill 
it up. But the vacancy has led to a great scandal 
and very much alarmed me. A clergyman who was 
aware of the lapse sold the knowledge of the fact for 
1000 1 to another clergyman who wanted preferment 
for his son and the father of the latter then applied 
to me for the Living. I have submitted the case to 
the Diocesan. Believe me, 

My dear Lord Brougham, 

Ever truly yours, 

St Leonards 

[Addressed— The Lord Brougham, Brougham Cas¬ 
tle, Penrith] 




H Group of lEnolisb Statesmen 227 


The concluding portion of the letter is a 
striking commentary on the condition of the 
Anglican Church in the middle of the nine¬ 
teenth century. We cannot wonder that 
men like Leslie Stephen could not remain 
in its ministry. 

This letter of Lord Cranworth has an 
autographic bearing. 


20 Upper Brook St. 

21 May, 1865. 

My dear Mr. Panizzi— 

My friend Addington who has lately returned from 
Italy met at Florence the American sculptor Mr. 
Powers who is making a head of our Saviour. 

Among the data on which he was forming his notion 
of what the expression of the countenance ought to 
be was a letter in English purporting to be a letter 
from “Publius Lentulus, President of Judea at the 
time when the fame of Jesus Christ began to spread 
abroad” The letter was said to have been removed 
by Bonaparte from the Vatican to Paris & Addington 
could not ascertain whether it was written in Greek 
or Latin. Do you know anything on the subject? 
I shd be glad of any information you can give me on 
the subject. Yours very truly, 

Cranworth 


This is not remarkably clear for a Chancel¬ 
lor. If the letter was “in English/’ how 




228 iRambles in autograph Xanb 


could it have been “in Greek or Latin”? 
No doubt he meant that Powers was working 
from an English copy of a supposed original. 

When Cranworth at seventy-five was made 
Chancellor for the second time, some kind 
friend—it is whispered that it was the Queen, 
but Mr. Atlay does not believe it—congratu¬ 
lated him saying, “Well, Cranny, Kingsley 
is right, it is better to be good than clever.” 
But Lord Selborne thought that Rolfe was 
one of the best Chancellors he had ever known, 
and even Campbell, whose judgments were 
apt to be severe, testified to “his unsullied 
honour, his warmth of heart, his instinctive 
rectitude of feeling, his legal acquirements, 
his patient industry, and his devoted desire 
to do his duty.” Westbury, however, was 
of a different mind and when some one re¬ 
marked to him, “I wonder why old Cranny 
always sits with the Lords Justices,” replied: 
“ I take it to arise from a childish indisposition 
to be left alone in the dark.” 

But Richard Bethell always had a bitter 
speech on the tip of his tongue—one reason 
why when he resigned his office under a cloud 




a ©roup of English Statesmen 229 


he did not get much real sympathy. One 
of his letters, brief as it is, has a fling against 
Lord Salisbury. He seldom gave the year 
when he dated his letters. 

House of Lords, May 12— 

Dear Lord Justice— 

Your idea of the proper addition to Lord Salis¬ 
bury’s foolish declaration was an excellent one. If 
there had been time I wd have given notice of an 
amendment on the report. 

Yours sincerely, 

Westbury 

The Lord Justice James— 

When Campbell became Chancellor at 
eighty, Lyndhurst made what Mr. Atlay 
calls “a most felicitous quotation” over the 
attainment by Campbell of everything he 
had ever looked forward to: “We may say of 
him, in the words of the poet: 

1 Thou hast it now, King, Cawdor, Glamis, all, 

As the weird woman promised.’” 

Mr. Atlay reminds us however that the un¬ 
quoted words following are: 

and I fear 

Thou playd’st most foully for it. 




230 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


One of my Campbell letters refers to his 
Lives of the Chancellors .” 

My dear Sir: 

I trust you are much better though you do not 
mention your health. I shall do very well with 
Gardiner. But I should be glad to have any experi¬ 
ences respecting his successor, Archbishop Heath. 
Then you must supply me with materials for Sir 
Nicholas Bacon, Sir Christopher Hatton, Sir John 
Puckering, & Lord Ellesmere which will bring me 
down to Lord Bacon. I remain 

Yours faithfully, 

Campbell 

He wrote a very ladylike hand, as did 
Grover Cleveland and General Winfield 
Scott. 


Patient, acute, and painstaking, William 
Page Wood, Lord Hatherly, was not one of 
the great Chancellors. It was said in regard 
to him: “When he who has too little piety 
is impossible and he who has too much is 
impracticable, he who has equal piety and 
ability becomes Lord Chancellor.” This let¬ 
ter of his was written when he was approach¬ 
ing eighty, in the small, feeble characters of 
an aged man with impaired eyesight—very 




a (Sroup of English Statesmen 231 


unlike the bold handwriting of a note written 
in 1872. His promise of an annual contri¬ 
bution did not involve him in much expense, 
for he died in less than three months. 


32 Gt George St. 

April 16, 1881. 

Dear Lady Selborne— 

I thank you for your confidence in my attachment 
to P. M. W. & gladly would I undertake to pay £30 
per annum during my life & the continuance of his 
work at St. Thomas. I cannot promise anything 
after my death. I have already provided annuities 
by my will to extend the amount of which might 
embarrass me with reference to relatives & others f 
while my means of satisfying them will be less. 

I shall call to leave this in the hope of seeing you for 
a few minutes. In the mean time I will express my 
hope that the Chancellor & yourself will enjoy some 
holiday before the long work of the session commences 
in the Lords. With best regards to him & yourself, 
believe me 

Yours very sincerely, 

Hatherly 

The Lady Selborne. 

A study of English jurisprudence leads one 
to believe that the general administration of 
equity was not benefited by that practical 
system of the “recall’’ under which a change 




232 IRambles in autograph lanb 


of the Ministry necessitates a change of 
Chancellors. The judicial functions of the 
Chancellor are at this time of so little impor¬ 
tance when compared with what they were in 
former days, that it is now a matter of little 
consequence. 




CHAPTER XII 

COLONIAL NOTABLES 


Colonial Governors: Bellingham; Sir Francis Bernard—Revolu¬ 
tionary: Sir Guy Carleton; Nathanael Greene; Richard 
Henry Lee—Literary: Bret Harte; Whittier; Bayard 
Taylor. 


The autographs of American Colonial Gov¬ 
ernors are well esteemed by American col¬ 
lectors, and the supply is not very plentiful. 
Some of the letters are fairly interesting but 
the documents are more numerous and their 
interest is chiefly historical. One of mine 
appears to have some connection with the 
hostility of the early settlers of New England 
to the habit of wearing long hair. It is an 
affidavit sworn to before Richard Bellingham, 
afterwards Governor of Massachusetts: 

I Jonathan Lambert aged about twenty yeares, 
deposeth and saith that coming in the ship Blossum, 
Mr. John Trumble comander after the shallop came 
233 


234 IRambles in Hutograpb OLanb 


abord I heard two of them say that thay shaved 
thare heads and further this deponent saith not dated 
ye 25th 4:1662. Sworn ye sd day 

R. Bellingham Dep Gov— 

Bellingham was Deputy Governor for 
thirteen years and Governor for ten years. 
When in 1641 he married for the second time, 
it is related that “a young gentleman was 
about to be contracted to a friend of his, 
when on a sudden the governor treated with 
her and obtained her for himself.” This 
was reversing the Miles Standish precedent. 
We are further told that the banns were not 
published properly, and that he performed 
the marriage ceremony himself. Bellingham 
was evidently a vigorous opponent of long 
hair. There is a document extant—I have 
only a printed copy—dated in 1649, signed 
by him as well as by Governor Endicott, 
Deputy Governor Thomas Dudley, and others 
as Magistrates, beginning: 

Forasmuch as the wearing of long hair after the manner 
of Russians and barbarous Indians, has begun to in¬ 
vade New England, contrary to the rule of God’s word, 
which says it is a shame for a man to wear long hair, 




Colonial 'Notables 


235 


as also the commendable custom of all the Godly of all 
our nation until within these few years— 

He ends by entreating the elders “to take 
care that the members of their respective 
churches be not defiled therewith.” 

Trevelyan in his History of the American 
Revolution says of Francis Bernard, Governor 
of New Jersey from 1758 to 1760 and of 
Massachusetts from 1760 to 1769: “Since 
Machiavelli undertook to teach the Medici 
how principalities might be governed and 
maintained, no such body of literature was 
put on paper as that in which Sir Francis 
Bernard (for his services procured him a 
baronetcy) instructed George the Third and 
his Ministers in the art of throwing away a 
choice portion of a mighty Empire.” Yet 
Bernard began well and bade fair to be a 
popular Governor. So highly was he at 
first esteemed in Massachusetts that the 
Assembly presented to him several addresses 
signifying their regard for him, and also voted 
to him a grant of Mount Desert Island—so 
that he might as well have given his name to 




236 IRambles in autograph Xanfc 


what is now Bar Harbor as to a township in 
Somerset County, New Jersey. His letter 
shows that in the second year of his service 
he enjoyed the favour of the colonists without 
abatement; but it also exhibits some traits 
of character which foretell disaster, and a 
lack of appreciation of the actual “popular 
spirit.’ ’ 


Castle William, Aug. 8,1761— 

Dear S r 

I am ashamed to see how long your last favor has 
laid by me unacknowledged; and yet it has been my 
misfortune rather than my fault. A wrong headed 
& ill advised Custom House officer had created so 
mi,ich trouble in his own & other public offices that 
It has required all my attention to keep the flame 
under. And this has engaged me in such a deal of 
ungracious writing, that I am greatly behindhand not 
only in my private but also in my public correspond¬ 
ence. But as I now contrive to spend a good part 
of my time in this retreat (which is on an Island 3 
miles from Boston) I hope soon to clear myself of 
my Epistolar Debts. 

I have never ballanced more nicely upon any sub¬ 
ject than I have upon the change of my Government; 
& my conclusion amounts to this: that in regard to 
myself it would not have been advisable; with a view 
of advantage to my children, it is for the better. 
The Increase of income affords no great weight in 
the scale, tho it will more than pay the increase of 



V 


• ^ 

( __ U A / d 


c 


; * ' 


i y/i a %.* A a // 


/r *&**•%. t y. if if/ 

L t * y ft. 1 * <- < / rt*',/' 


* 

/ 

/ 

/ 


/ 

. j» 

r* 

/ 

• w . 1 


< 

V 

C^/ * 

X 



A y 

At 

• X 

%+s r~*i 

C A'? 

rJv f 

/t * A Z 


y 

1 . < .« 

s 

(<L 4S 

# ^ 

/ » * 

• i C H 

/„*> . 

r 

,'*f m 

* A 


^,. 


•/ 

/ 

6 ' ... «. 


</ 


/ 




** tf« t 

/ 

'* i y * <v 


< / 

^ A. / >-* /- // 


t* y* /> x ^ yy* ^ 

/ 

^ / / . 

s'<.*/&**/A* / * '/ «/ 7 cf 4 .ic*y ^ lv . <•« 

y y * y * / ^ 

4* A 4i 4 /*»<- r Si >*.<. £ >. I . tin/ /£/ 


A>i < 

/ 


/ *// V 

A lO / it*. /*- 1 .-* >*.*. 

• y ; /' 

/ K %1(t f /L 7 4. 


si *- a. +■ ' /* J± y / * * e *r *•» 

✓ • *' / / 

X. 4 U.- f 


' • /Z,/ 


0. .i /.«. •/» *A / <y £4 A--4+* A. 4 A.r/ *y / >1 vil, y //I,.*,-^ 

/ > ■ ' ' <- ' t / / 

/'«» X i y'' S ft vA v • f* *\ ^Z<. C*~>> *■ // r/*. vV/« <.<_ (t A h. f 






/ 

* V * /ii.^t 


// 




/*« >X*y l< /'L <.a / / 4 ^ X* z X^ * 


^ i' ** I X S' ' r /S\y 

1 ' J „ S £ 


f A >v 


''ky 

< / 


ft***- ft '/ /;i * / * ' Ay^- , J> c/<*L '< Sf* s 

Xvy s A * # X" /X «_ Zz^X ///^ 

/ z / ✓ 

, > / - X . 

/c.f a z* 4 ^^2*. Accr/L 

/ / y '**' 

*" A r*. A^> v ,'4<_ i'/i A *- 

^ ^ 

ty S-I'C t :t //*/u r / Ay a >M. 

Aitrf / / / k f *1 7 +*~ /iv«^ * / *' / / a 

At* 4. p1k'4r/*.y/1 i U'+yf +<■ l C<»y rf 4iV^,i /jc/* <V ‘//ty 

/ / A i 




7v •/ 1 * V 

/ 


C- 


C //<•* / , #» /%. 


■4 




t* /y.4 S' A. ■»<<•■ , *X ^ f Z»T. .<<c' **f SS'4-l_ . s'/l4— ( Z* 

-***- */^ 


/:' 


/k * f'+rt-'C 




&* t 1 *- *•» f 


/X Un./i /a 4. Any 

Ai 7 *£ A ‘ />_ 


^ vy' X X M, 


z-»t. 


y - 

^ ^ ^ >/ 

"V A/» U ~1 H 6 £ *^/A. 1 *c 

_/ I • • X X y/ 

4-<cAd . t^- * •-' ^4;^, 

>: ^ M.t U^c.Y' ^i^C-- : *y £*~/ A,si s/ 

'A* *u~st <- ** 

**+S // /u/C HtjfS *** yy , ^ 


Z*>r. ? 

4 ^1/* . 


A L. S. of Sir Francis Bernard, August 8, 1761 














Colonial notables 


237 


expence; but it by no means will compensate for the 
addition of trouble. State and importance I reckon 
on the minus side: I had full enough of them, 
(too much for a Philosopher) in my former Govern¬ 
ment, and of all things in Life, did not want an increase 
of them. Power I cannot entirely disclaim—because 
it makes part of my System to provide for my children. 
This is my chief View: I have immediately obtained 
a good opportunity of having my children well 
educated under my Eye & have a fair prospect of 
procuring good settlements for them when they are 
fit for it. And upon this account I cheerfully submit 
to State and Politicks, & endeavour to persuade my¬ 
self that the Life is very tolerable. 

This Province is very much altered from what it 
has been; the popular spirit is much subsided & 
the true Idea of the English Government begins to 
be well understood. Allmost All the Men whose 
Superior Talents or Fortunes lift them above the 
common People are friends to Government: the 
present Assembly is well filled with them. The Bone 
of Contention between the Governor & People is 
now removed by a compromise. The Salary indeed 
is granted annually; but then it is considered only as 
a form. It must be the first Act passed upon the 
opening of the Annual Assembly; & it is known that 
the Governor is instructed to pass no Act untill the 
Act for granting at least £1000 sterling to the Gover¬ 
nor is sent up. So that it is now put upon the footing 
of a Convention, the breach of which must put a stop 
to all Business. In other matters the People observe 
their Compact with the Crown with more preciseness 
than in most other Governments. The independent 




238 •Rambles In Hutograpb Xanb 


power of the Captain General in all military business 
is held inviolate: and the power of the Governor with 
advise of Council to issue all public money is strictly 
maintained. Both these Rights have broke in upon 
in New York & New Jersey & the encroachments are 
still insisted upon. All Commissions & officers in 
this Province are in the Gift of the Governor, the 
Military absolutely, the Civil with the advice of 
Council, which seldom or never opposes the Governor’s 
Nominations. Upon the whole the Governor’s power 
is sufficiently independant & the People, well enough 
disposed to promise a quiet Administration to a 
prudent & moderate Man. 

Thus much for my Political Situation. My private 
Life I must reserve for another Letter at more leisure. 
The most pleasant account of me will be from this 
Castle, where I spend 4 or 5 days in the week during 
the summer in a very agreeable manner. I have here 
a most delightful apartment to which I am making 
some small additions to accommodate Mrs. Bernard 
who is very fond of this place. Here I am quite a 
private Gentleman, excepting a few Military honors 
upon releiving the guard &c. & excepting military 
business, which has been my case this month past, 
having been collecting & embarking 1000 provincials 
to releive the regulars at Halifax. 

I shall want to know how you fare amongst the 
changes & chances of this mortal life. You still 
superintend the Treasury of Ireland, & I understand 
are the Representative of Aylesbury. This last gives 
me pleasure, as I conclude from thence that you visit 
in a large House in that Neighbourhood, about which 
I have heretofore wandered & wished to see you 




Colonial IRotables 239 


there. Wherever you are & whatever you do, you 
have my good wishes. Mrs. Bernard joins with me 
in compliments to Lady Ellis. 

I am S r 

Your most affectionate & faithful servant, 

Frn. Bernard 

It may be true that Sir Francis merely 
carried out a policy urged upon him by the 
Ministry and certain to arouse the colonists 
to revolt, but the Dictionary of National 
Biography asserts that this policy not only 
had his complete approval but “he succeeded 
in giving to its harsher features unnecessary 
prominence.” “Indeed,” says his biographer, 
“the line of action pursued by the home 
government was, to some extent, traceable 
to his unfavourable representations of the 
original designs and motives of the colonists, 
and his fatal deficiency in political tact and 
insight undoubtedly assisted to hasten the 
war.” 

From Colonial governors to generals of the 
Revolution is an easy transition. I select 
from the portfolios only three letters, for the 
British and American examples are so numer- 




240 IRambles in Butoarapb Xanb 


ous that they would occupy a volume by 
themselves. One of the letters is from that 
high-minded soldier, Sir Guy Carleton, who 
was devoted to the cause of England and is 
described as “firm, humane, and of the most 
unvarying courtesy under all circumstances.’’ 
His conduct in America was in striking con¬ 
trast with that of the Clintons, Howes, and 
Burgoyne. Bancroft maintains that Carleton 
was the cause of the failure of the Burgoyne 
campaign; that he originated the idea of that 
invasion, in order to gratify his personal 
ambition, and expecting to come down from 
Canada to assume general command in the 
colonies, since he ranked Sir William Howe; 
and that Howe, fearing supersession, refused to 
co-operate. If that be true, Carleton rendered 
to the Americans a service entitling him to 
their lasting gratitude; but the explanation 
is far-fetched and fanciful. Carleton did 
hope, at the outset, to be assigned to command 
the invading forces, but Germaine, his personal 
opponent, gave the honour to Burgoyne, and 
Carleton, taking what George III. pronounced 
to be “the only dignified part,” resigned 



» 



* 



Sir Guy Carleton 

From an etching by H. B. Hall 













/ 




first page of A L. S. of Sir Guy Carleton to General de Riedesel, June 6, 1783 









Last page of a L. S. of Sir Guy Carleton to General de Riedesel, June 6, 1783 
























Colonial IRotables 


241 


his office as governor of Canada. When 
Lord North refused to accept the resignation, 
Carleton did his whole duty and loyally 
aided Burgoyne to the utmost. Howe had 
no reason to think that Carleton, of all 
officers, would supplant him. His habitual 
inaction sufficiently accounts for his conduct. 
This letter was written to Baron von Riedesel 
while Carleton was in command in New York, 
after the war was virtually over. 


New York, 6" June, 1783. 

Sir. 

In my last to you of the 17th of April by Cornet 
Schoenewald I informed you that I had intended to 
send all the Brunswick Troops to Canada by the 
earliest opportunity but that the change in public 
affairs had rendered it impossible to spare transports 
for that purpose. I notwithstanding directed Major 
General Paterson to send to Canada the clothing, 
camp equipage, and other stores, of which your troops 
were in want, and hope they have arrived safe before 
this time. 

Having in the 1st instant received the King’s 
commands, to send to Europe, without delay, all the 
German troops serving in this Army, I am preparing 
to comply therewith as soon as possible, and mean 
to send those belonging to the Duke of Brunswick 
in the first Embarkation. I have given the like 
directions respecting those now serving in the district 

16 




242 TRambles in autograph Xanfc 


of Nova Scotia. The whole will proceed to the downs 
which is the rendezvous appointed, and where they 
will receive further orders. 

I transmit herewith a letter from Lord North which 
his Lordship desired might be forwarded by the first 
opportunity. 

Some of the Brunswick Prisoners still remain in 
New England; measures have been taken for their 
speedy enlargements. I shall say nothing more on this 
subject as Lieutenant Rienking, who is apprised of 
the express going to Canada, will give you the fullest 
information of every particular. 

I am, Sir, 

Your most obedient and most humble servant, 
Guy Carleton 

Major General Riedesel— 

Another letter is from that sterling patriot 
and efficient officer, Nathanael Greene. In 
the winter of 1778-79 Washington’s army 
was encamped at Middlebrook, New Jersey, 
on the Raritan River, not far from what is now 
Bound Brook. Towards the end of May, 
1779, news came that the British were about 
to begin some important enterprise on the 
Hudson, and the troops were ordered to break 
camp and proceed by way of Morristown to 
the Highlands. The army began the march 
on June 2, 1779. A few days before that, 





Nathanael Greene 

From an engraving by R. Whitechurch, after the painting by R. Peale 







yU./££. 

^^ 


* > t~ *- ^ ^ ,i - ^ -/ /^SZT 
'J t~£~* 4^/7 <z± i-r- — 




y&s n^-XT^Xc 7 \ ^XXy c^r~>, , 

sS&erz*^^' a-~zZ^*~*-'A~' 

fo*’ /X2y^- /Pt^cT^jX> ^ ^ 



L* yi<- 


Mz £ 



<-^~£ d ^ X*^C'Z- <*-j/<r 

/Xx - 





* mmm y 





&”2- 



A. L. S. of Nathanael Greene to Colonel James Abele, May 25, 1779 

















Colonial IRotables 


243 


Greene writes to Colonel James Abele, Deputy- 
Quart ermaster-General, who was stationed at 
Morristown: 


Camp, May 25, 1779. 

Sir— 

The General has given me orders to put the army 
in a state to move if it should be found necessary. 
Let all the Markees, Horseman and Wall Tents come 
down as soon as possible; also the Canteens which 
Mr. Weese wrote for some days since. Don’t let 
a moments time be lost in sending forward the 
stores. You will remember what I have wrote you 
respecting the General’s orders should be kept a 
secret as the enemy may take advantage of the 
intimation. 

Mrs. Greene & my compliments to Mrs. Abele. 

I am sir 

Your humble servt 

N. Greene 

Q.M.G. 

Col. Abele— 

A letter of Benedict Arnold to Governor 
George Clinton possesses a peculiar interest 
because it was written only a month before 
the treason was discovered. Arnold met 
Andre at the Robinson house on the night of 
September 21, 1780, and Andre was captured 
on the morning of September 23d. 




244 IRambles in Hutograpb %anf> 


Headquarters, Robinson’s House. 

August 22nd 1780. 


Dear Sir: 

In a letter of yesterday’s date from Major Ville 
Fra,nche Engineer at these Posts, I am informed that 
the middle part of the chain is sinking & in a very 
dangerous situation: that unless it be soon raised & 
secured it will not be in our power to do it, but at a 
great expence of labour & time. This cannot be done 
without timber, to haul which we are not supplied 
with teams. 

I find it necessary also to inform you, sir, that many 
of the works & public buildings at these Posts are in 
a ruinous & perishing condition, and that besides 
securing & repairing them, it is not only expedient 
but absolutely necessary that a number of new bar¬ 
racks & buildings be erected & built before cold 
weather comes on, for the accommodation of the 
troops who are to remain in garrison here during the 
approaching winter, without which it will be impossi¬ 
ble to have the Posts properly secured. 

I am not furnished with half the number of teams 
for the daily works of the garrison, altho I have 
applied frequently to the Q. Master Genl. & to Colo. 
Hay to furnish them. In answer to my applications 
& pressing solicitations on the subject, I am informed 
by the Quarter Masters that they have horses, but 
neither carts, large waggons, or harness to spare for 
me, nor money to procure them with. 

In this situation, sir, I am under the necessity of 
looking up to your Excellency for such assistance as 
it may be in your power or in that of this State to 
furnish me with, for securing Posts established at 





Benedict Arnold 

From an engraving by B. L. Provost after a drawing from life by 

Du Simitier 
































































































































2 




o. 




/ v^ . 

















"/r yO<* <•-**-»-* SSS~ Y-rr'S * U 

/7 . JL^ ^ ^ 


.S 


sf's^y r*^£ A s£+ v <■< 


~'3yj s * A-. *. ' '; 


£ * r, «. X x <►», ^ S$C, j/<*r <** c-44st < *y' e^r ASs/C*sAJ 

~ / S<<* / -/^C **.*-*,, OS ^ jr<.~, A 

/ *jfr +-y , 4, A < *-^S 

* ^ . s ^ ^ 


^ <ssf AA+ A^o^AcJ^ 


<y** 


J^c rs SSrr. ., Ao 


// 

'* ^ /^ly r -^ •. ^^-O 1 A 

/ )^^C-/A//' r^ 4^> /yyiy-4 /a- /•/ 

^■Q4t-r, / /*, ^jfc<-<j^ . v ■*-. 'fAA s irf^As, SC-x'S , su -* 

~*~/ /f ■*> * e-e-^A /^< »i 9 <„c^s£) A *-~~S 

—^/v— /^- y***^*-*^* **' e -A£^ 


f—.+. 

6s. 


Si. 






'-*-•*. c* ■»*,<>,^ A ^*<*yCro'^^. 6 . y A^AAUs 

-*7s £ S*+Ac. ,. Aj'j'j x-t-x^<,- z->- */ A^*/ y : y7'**? *'^ ^ 




4r — ~~ ^ /A*s ~~2> 

s __>- _,\ s ^y 


-A Af^zAt.y 


X -Z e^\M /-t 


« /'r. 

^ ^.,,^,/y/.^ A,y^. r ' 
* - * - * ; ,, „/,-^jA,. 

»...,, ^ &&* 


^ j£« Syr ^..'i,c**A*p^'/~Aw S. .***/ 

6~ ~ A7 <7y, f, ^ 


r <e-»»x_^~' Zz» 


L. 


_•_-.*. -i 


/ '" A, /, .^v Z^. tSyb'i.^c 

*/ v Ay, ^ 

°'**y—~.<sAD <~,//: ALs 

'•jSL 


n<^tu. 


O't^C C^Ok ^ j^ 


"t/ 


* > *"'"’ AT, -* *y '- sA /tsx*^. es -AA-r >Tf *-<'^s 


f 6>yi.0^*s y^>^ 6 *<,<>' s^Si 

'^, £<s*AS ^ £s</, 4LSSf-*^t ^,7 J ^ A^ ^^cSj 


■^/ > 


S°-^cKj. 

<S%L* j 6 sza+*,-a~ 

^ f / 

n ■ . >.. S' 

ys, z<. -. v;.. _ ^‘('^‘a 

\ \ 4'^^. / ^ ^7 5 



Last page of A 


. L. S. of Benedict Arnold to Governor George Clinton, August 

1780 










Colonial IRotables 


245 


such amazing expence & which are of such vast im¬ 
portance to the United States in general & to this in 
particular. 

I therefore beg the favor of your Excellency to 
grant to Colo. Hay, Agent for the State, such power 
as may be necessary and you enabled to vest him 
with, for procuring by impress or otherwise, as many 
teams as may be necessary to carry on the public 
works to advantage here, or at least sufficient to 
enable us to secure those which are now in a decaying 
state and to construct such buildings as are indis¬ 
pensably necessary. 

By the late appointment of Colo. Pickering to the 
Quarter Master Generalcy (who is not arrived in 
camp) everything is become so much deranged in that 
Department as to deprive me of all hopes of season¬ 
able assistance from him; even if he does arrive soon 
& is furnished with the necessaries for procuring teams. 

From this state of facts your Excellency will be 
enabled to judge of our situation here, & doubt not 
will furnish us with every assistance in your power. 

I have the honor to be, with the greatest regard 
Your Excellency’s most obedt & most hble servt, 

B. Arnold 

His Excellency Govr. Clinton. 

While we are on the subject of the Revolu¬ 
tion, a letter of Richard Henry Lee may be 
quoted: 

Baltimore, 17* Jany, 1777. 

Dear Sir :—I am favored with yours by Maj r Johns¬ 
ton and I should certainly have served him to the 





246 IRambles in Hutograpb Xan6 


utmost of my power in Congress if the appointment 
you proposed for Mr. Johnston had not now been in 
another channel. You know, Sir, that by a late re¬ 
solve of Congress—the General is to fill up all vacan¬ 
cies in the Continental troops that shall happen for 
six months from the date of the resolve. I have 
recommended it to the Major to get a letter from you 
and the council, with one from Colonel Harrison, 
to the General in his favor, and if he is very intent 
on success, to carry them himself. I think this will 
not fail to procure him the commission he desires, 
and in the mean time, the Lieutenants and Ensign 
may be recruiting the company. We have not 
heard from General Washington since the 5th 
instant when he was at Morris Town in West Jersey 
about 20 miles from Brunswick where the enemy 
keep their head quarters. But a Gentleman who 
arrived here yesterday, and who passed thro our 
army at Morris Town on the 8th says the men were 
in high spirits, that he thinks they were 12000 strong, 
that they were under marching orders and they were 
supposed to be going towards Elizabeth Town, which 
is between the main body of the enemy and New 
York. That Gen. Heath was to join them on the 
9th with between 2 and 5 thousand men. That the 
Jersey militia had many skirmishes with the British 
troops and always beat them. That he met large 
bodies of militia on march to the Jersies, whence he 
concluded that the enemy must either quit that 
State soon or be exposed to great danger by remain¬ 
ing there. Unluckily our army consists almost en¬ 
tirely of militia whose stay is very uncertain, and 
renders the speedy coming up of regular troops 




Colonial Bo tables 


247 


absolutely necessary. I am with very particular 
regard and esteem, dear Sir, your most obedient and 
most humble servant, 

Richard Henry Lee 

The fame of Lee ought to have been more 
permanent. He was honoured in Virginia, he 
was noted for his eloquence, and he had all 
the opportunities for achieving immortality. 
He moved the resolution for the Declaration 
of Independence. But he seems to have 
had the unfortunate habit—which one of 
our great railway kings attributed to his own 
son-in-law—of “betting on the wrong horse.” 
He was of the cabal which opposed Washing¬ 
ton, and he was hostile to the adoption of the 
Constitution. He had been willing to take 
office under the odious Stamp Law. In 1776 
he was subjected to severe criticism because, 
anticipating the depreciation of the Conti¬ 
nental money, he required his tenants to 
pay him in gold, silver, or tobacco—a most 
unfortunate act, which nearly lost him his 
seat in Congress. We are told that “plain, 
solid common-sense was the distinguishing 
characteristic of his mind,” but we can scarcely 



248 IRambles in Butoorapb Xanb 


believe it in view of his actions. His reputa¬ 
tion as an orator was eclipsed by that of his 
friend Patrick Henry, who was intellectually 
his inferior, although Henry was antagonistic 
to the Constitution; and his eminence as a 
hero of the Revolution has been dwarfed by 
that of his great fellow-Virginian against 
whom he intrigued persistently but unsuccess¬ 
fully. 

Colonial governors and Revolutionary 
generals are well enough in their way, but 
the paths of literature are to me more attrac¬ 
tive than those of colonial history. American 
literary autographs may not be so expensive 
as English ones, but many of them are fully 
as interesting. The first ones I find before 
me are those of Bret Harte, whose letters 
and manuscripts are becoming objects of 
special concern, if we may judge by the present 
prices they command. 

A Life of Bret Harte published within the 
past year or so is well written but it is quite 
disappointing. It might well be called 
4 ‘Sketches of Early Days in California with 
incidental references to Bret Harte,” and it 




Colonial IRotables 


249 


leaves an unpleasant impression of the char¬ 
acter and career of the subject. The Life by 
T. Edgar Pemberton, published in 1903, is 
much more satisfactory in my way of thinking, 
although it may not be constructed so scien¬ 
tifically as its successor. One paragraph in 
Pemberton’s book is especially amusing to a 
collector. Reference is made to a story that 
while Harte was living at Morristown he re¬ 
tained the postage stamps sent to him by 
people seeking his autograph and that these 
applications were so numerous that with the 
stamps thus obtained he paid his butcher’s bill. 
Mr. Pemberton adds that “that slander has 
been denied on the authority of the butcher." 

“The Luck of Roaring Camp” first ap¬ 
peared in the Overland Monthly for August, 
1868. Mr. Pemberton says: 

After it was printed the return mail from the East 
brought a letter addressed to the “ Editor of The 
Overland Monthly ” enclosing a letter from Fields, 
Osgood & Co., the publishers of The Atlantic Monthly , 
addressed to the—to them—unknown author of “ The 
Luck of Roaring Camp.” This the author opened, and 
found to be a request, upon the most flattering terms, 
for a story for the Atlantic similar to the “ Luck.” 




250 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


Although this assertion is made on the author¬ 
ity of Harte himself, I venture to doubt 
whether the proposal of Field, Osgood & Co. 
followed so quickly the appearance of the 
story in the Overland. This letter written 
at least seven months later than the publica¬ 
tion of the “Luck” is not quite consistent with 
the idea of such an early application. 

Rooms of The Overland Monthly. 

San Francisco, April 23, 1869. 

Gentlemen : 

In regard to your proposal to examine a collection 
of my California Sketches with a view to republica¬ 
tion, I fear that you have overestimated the number 
of my contributions to the Overland , wh. are (of 
stories) but two—“The Luck of Roaring Camp” and 
“The Outcasts of Poker Flat,” the latter one in the 
Jany. no. 

I am writing a little sketch similar in style for the 
June no. and have in view three or four more, when 
the pressure of my editorial duties shall be lifted 
either by the suspension of the Magazine or a division 
of its editorial work—which since the inception of 
the O. M. has fallen entirely on me. One or the 
other will happen about the 1st June. 

I have one or two California sketches published 
before (but not in the Overland ) and not included in 
the “Condensed Novels,” but even these would not, 
together with the “Luck” and the “Outcasts” make 
a volume of the size suggested. 




Colonial IRotables 


251 


As my contract with Carleton of N. Y. expired 
with his first and only edition of the ‘‘Condensed 
Novels” (1500 copies) would it not be possible to 
translate one or two sketches from that? 

Will you be good enough to tell me also what the 
Atlantic would pay for stories like these proposed. 

Yours very truly, 

Fr. Bret Harte 

Messrs. Fields, Osgood & Co. 

Boston— 


Still, it is possible that Harte waited for 
seven months before troubling himself to find 
out what price he would get for a story. He 
was charmingly careless about money matters. 

We are told by his biographer that “one of 
the horrors of his existence was the omni¬ 
present autograph hunter,” and that in the 
closing days of his life, when asked by a young 
lady of the Pemberton household to whom he 
could not well say no, to sign his name in her 
“troublesome friend’s still more troublesome 
birthday book,” he complied, saying, “Tell 
that young woman I hate, loathe, and de¬ 
spise her.” In his failing hours a letter came 
from a member of Mr. Roosevelt’s family 
making a somewhat similar request. At the 




252 TRamblce in autograph Xanb 


moment, he condemned it, with the scores of 
such applications, to the wastepaper basket,” 
and then he said, “No! that may be from a 
child. I ’ll send my signature.” 

It may be a heinous offence, but to me the 
“poetry” of Whittier has always appeared 
to be of no high order of merit. He may have 
been a person of beautiful character, although 
he was guilty of atrocious injustice towards 
Daniel Webster in that famous poem called 
Ichabod. In his Abolition rage and fanati¬ 
cism he did not scruple to proclaim a wretched 
libel upon a noble statesman; and while he 
was afterwards a little ashamed of his per¬ 
formance, he never had courage enough to 
say so publicly. A letter of his exhibits him 
as a truly disinterested patriot, who had 
“always voted the Republican ticket entire” 
regardless of principles or the qualifications 
of candidates, begging for a little political 
pap. It is not surprising to learn that in his 
younger days, when he was a member of the 
Massachusetts Legislature, he was a vigorous 
political plotter and had “large faith in his 
lobbying capacity.” 




Colonial IRotables 


253 


Newburyport, 9th 11 mo 1876— 
Ben : x Perley Poore Esq. 

My dear friend:— 

I am very sorry I was not at home when thee called 
with thy English friend. I fully intended before 
this to have visited thee, but I have had company 
all the time & have often been too ill to leave home. 

I am glad the election is over; and glad that the 
Democratic has ceased to be formidable. As I 
always have done I voted the Republican ticket 
entire but not without some fear that the over¬ 
whelming majority may be taken as endorsement of 
all abuses and errors. I like the speech of General 
Hawley. If his advice is taken all will be well. 

My brother M. F. Whittier who is a clerk in the 
Boston C. H. fears that he may lose his place—one 
of the hardest and most respectable in the concern,—- 
if rotation is decided upon. He is a staunch republi¬ 
can & has done good service with his pen by his letters 
of "Ethan Spike of Hornley.” Of his faithfulness 
and ability in his place, Mr. Hamlin will vouch. 
Will it be asking too much of thee to speak to Gen. 
Wilson about him, & to request him to say a word 
to Judge Russell in his behalf? I should esteem it a 
great favor & if it is ever in my power will reciprocate 
it. Believe me very truly thy frd, 

John G. Whittier 

1 It will be remembered that Mr. Poore affected the quaint 
conceit of putting the colon punctuation mark after Ben, and 
the newspapers and his friends were careful to respect the idio¬ 
syncrasy. Mr. Poore explained the usage on the ground that 
his Christian name was not Benjamin, but merely Ben. Even 
then, why the colon? 




254 Wambles in autograph Uanb 


My brother has the general charge of the monthly 
returns to Washington, of the entire accounts of the 
Collector and Cashier. He has averaged six hours 
of hard labor per day and has been absent not above 
2 days in a year. Mr. Slack of the Commonwealth 
and Dep. Coll. Fisk can give thee any information 
concerning him. 

Like most high-minded partisans of his 
type, he makes his brother’s party services 
the main basis for his retention in office, 
relegating the fraternal merits as a clerk— 
with his six hours a day of “hard labor”— 
to a postscript. His rejoicings over the fact 
that “the Democratic [sic] has ceased to be 
formidable ” were a little premature, for the let¬ 
ter was penned only a few days after the date 
on which, as every one knows, Mr. Tilden 
received a majority of the electoral vote 
over Mr. Hayes; and as almost every one now 
concedes, Mr. Tilden was deprived of his 
office by rather disreputable devices, doubtless 
with the cordial approval of the poet whose 
brother’s place in the Custom House was at 
stake. 

Bayard Taylor was not a New Englander; 
he was not a professional Abolitionist; he was 




Colonial IRotables 


255 


not a reckless defamer of men who, in all 
sincerity and good faith, considered the peace 
of the whole country and the maintenance 
of its Constitution to be of paramount im¬ 
portance compared with the liberation of 
the negroes of the Southern States; but he 
was a npble figure in our literary history and 
honoured in public as well as in private life. 
There is more poetic fire in a line of the 
Bedouin Love Song than in all the placid 
volumes of the Quaker poet, and the broad 
field of his culture dwarfs into insignificance 
Whittier’s little rocky patch. No one can 
fancy Taylor drivelling in the thin sentiment 
of “Maud Muller” or the pseudo-patriot¬ 
ism of “Barbara Frietchie.” This letter to 
Professor Willard Fiske of Cornell University 
deals with the subject of political patronage, 
but affords a pleasant contrast with the letter 
of Whittier. 


142 East i8th St. New York. 

Feb. 23, 1878. 

Confidential. 

My dear Fiske: 

Boyesen has just been here, and brought me later 
news of you—the tide of congratulation has not yet 




256 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


ceased. I have written somewhere about 125 ac¬ 
knowledgments since Sunday last—and still they 
come! 

I have already had about 25 applications for 
Secretaryships, when I have none to give; the simple 
facts are these:—the present Administration reserves 
to itself the right to make all subordinate appoint¬ 
ments; when Bancroft Davis resigned, the two places 
at Berlin were filled by the President, Sidney Everett 
(Edward E’s son) getting the first rank;—so there is 
no vacancy, and if there were, I have not the sole 
power to fill it. Lowell, for instance, wanted young 
Henry James for his secretary; but the government 
appointed another man. 

Now, between ourselves, I suspect that Everett 
(who is said to be in good circumstances, and who 
lives in England) simply wants the social prestige 
of the place. He has been charge d’Affaires for seven 
months and will not relish being remanded to a lower 
position after I reach Berlin. Of course, this is only 
surmise on my part, but all I hear of Mr. E. makes 
it probable. 

Should he resign, would you take the place? I 
have thought of you, in connection with it, from the 
very first,—and I cannot fix upon anybody else who 
is at once so competent and so welcome to me in all 
respects. I could not make the appointment, but 
I should do my best to have it made by the President, 
and I feel sure that it could be accomplished. In 
any case, I should know Mr. E’s intentions in advance 
of anybody else, and thus get your name first before 
the appointing powers. The salary is $2625. 

I don’t believe that Boyesen could, in any case, get 





Bayard Taylor 





































































Colonial IRotables 


257 


the First Secretary’s place; and the Second Secretary 
at Berlin is likely to stay on, since he loses nothing 
by my coming. I should prefer Boyesen to anybody 
but you; but, in case of a vacancy, I am sure you could 
be appointed, and if I should ask for Boyesen there 
would be the chance of having some unknown and 
perhaps incompetent man in his stead. 

I am writing as if sure of my own confirmation— 
which is perhaps indiscreet. However, I only get 
good news from Washington. Evarts writes to me 
that it will not be delayed; but I can’t go to Washing¬ 
ton until afterwards. Please let me know, soon, how 
my proposal strikes you. 

Ever faithfully, 

Bayard Taylor. 

Another letter, to Osgood, has a more 
literary flavour. 


Kennett Square, Penn’a. 

Dec. 17, 1870. 

Personal — 

My dear Osgood: 

I left in such hurry on Thursday morning that I 
had no time to give you more than a very hasty 
assurance of my readiness to transfer to the new firm 
all the good-will and friendly interest which, for 
sixteen years past, I have felt for the old one. It is 
just twenty-four years since I have known Fields. 
He was the next after Griswold and Willis to speak a 
most welcome word for my first book, and I have never 
found any one since more frank, patient and apprecia¬ 
tive (qualities not often combined!) than he. Hence 


17 






258 iRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


I shall miss him from his old place, until I get accus¬ 
tomed to the change; but you can understand this 
implies not the least lack of friendly confidence in 
his successors. Since the change must be made, I, 
for my part, could not wish a more satisfactory one. 
I do not believe in mutual interest without mutual 
esteem and trust; and I assure you now that I still 
look forward to the day when I shall be able to unite 
my separated books under one imprint, and that 
yours. 

I think there are signs that the long darkness 
succeeding the war is about passing away, and literary 
interests—always the last to revive—will gradually 
improve. Our best age is yet to come, and I hope 
and believe that it will come while you and your 
associates can share in it. As an author, I wish, of 
course, to have an equal share! 

Will you please order sent to me, by express, a 
handsome half-calf copy of Faust , instead of the two 
remaining copies. I want to give it to my wife on 
Christmas Eve, and am therefore anxious to get it 
in season. 

Always truly yours, 
Bayard Taylor 








' 






•• 


















































■V 














































































































CHAPTER XIII 

AMERICAN AUTHORS 


Bancroft to Taylor—Holmes to Taylor—Holmes to Underwood 
—Mark Twain to Taylor—Longfellow to Taylor—Lowell 
to Taylor—Motley to Badeau—A Hawthorne letter— 
Aldrich to George P. Morris—Artemus Ward—Noah Webster 
—Charles G. Halpine—Chief Justice Chase. 


Men may often be judged by the letters 
that are written to them as well as by those 
they write themselves. The cordial esti¬ 
mation in which the big-hearted Bayard 
Taylor was held by his contemporaries in 
literature is abundantly shown in their letters 
to him, some of which I have been fortunate 
enough to acquire. I have quoted those of 
Tennyson and Christina Rossetti, and am 
tempted to add some Americans. There is 
one from George Bancroft. When we recall 
that the famous historian was in early life 
possessed of the delusion that he too was a 

259 


26o IRambles in Hutograpb Uanb 


poet, it has a humorous suggestion. Ban¬ 
croft’s slim volume of awkward and boyish 
verse, if it may be dignified with that name, 
appeared in 1823 and was thereafter carefully 
suppressed, so that it has become a veritable 
“rarity.” The Century Club in New York 
celebrated the seventieth birthday of Bryant 
on the night of November 1, 1864, and 
Bancroft presided over a notable gathering 
honoured by the presence of Emerson and of 
Holmes. Taylor’s ode, sung to music com¬ 
posed by Louis Lang, then a well-known 
artist of New York, was “one of the features, ” 
as the reporters may have said. It had been 
submitted to Bancroft, and his proposed 
amendments may have been logical and proper 
enough, but one cannot help feeling that the 
real poet was better able to decide what was ap¬ 
propriate. For example, the idea of a change 
from the past tense to the present is more in 
the spirit of the historian than in that of the 
poet. This is what Bancroft wrote: 


Dear Mr. Taylor— 

Mr. Lang has just left with 


Saturday, 29 Oct. ’64. 
me your chant for 




Hmerican authors 


26l 


Bryant’s 70th birthday. It is admirable; I expected 
good from you; & you have done exceedingly well. 
You need never regret that you made this most 
successful effort. 

With your consent I propose to read stanza V and 
VI in the present tense; as Bryant still writes; “He 
sings of mountains”; “But hears a voice”; “which 
says”; & stanza VI—He sings of truth; He sings of 
right; He^sings of freedom. 

You are too modest. You poets are never of the 
past. 

The Vllth stanza is probably clear to one familiar 
with Bryant’s poem. If we print it I will in the 
margin quote one or two of the lines you refer to as 
Bryant’s prophecy. I delight always in suggestions 
from my friends, claiming always a right to disregard 
them. May I make a suggestion, even if probably 
to find that the change had occurred to your own 
mind? & been rejected. 

Stanza VII 

God bid him live, till in her place 

Truth crushed to earth again shall rise 
The “mother of a mighty race” 

Fulfil her poet’s prophecies. 

The former suggestion as to present tense in stanzas 
V & VI I feel sure about; this I doubt about; that is, 
I think again shall rise is better than shall risen be; 
but prophecies in the plural for the rhyme is no im¬ 
provement on the singular “prophecy.” 

Again I say, that I am very much, indeed very much 
delighted with your chant, & shall not make the changes 




262 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


of tense or in Stanza 7 without your special consent 
& desire. 

Yours very truly, 

Geo Bancroft 

No one knows or will know of these trifling sugges¬ 
tions. Let me hear from you by return mail. 

Holmes writes in a characteristically genial 
and affectionate way. The dream may have 
been only a pleasant fiction, but the method 
of expressing kindly appreciation of a poem 
was surely a novel and a graceful one. 


Boston, Sept. 1st, 1875. 

My dear Taylor, 

I must tell you something very odd. Yesterday 
morning when I woke up I had been having an absurd 
dream. I was walking in Washington Street, when 
all at once you, Bayard Taylor, ampler in dimensions 
than your actual goodly personality, seized me and 
carried me as Gulliver might have carried a Lilli¬ 
putian a few rods and then set me down, surprised, 
but unharmed and not feeling aggrieved by the 
familiar treatment to which I had been subjected. 

The dream had hardly ceased vibrating in my mem¬ 
ory when on coming down stairs I took my Daily 
Advertiser and there you were again, almost the 
first thing I laid my eyes on! Lo, I was taken up 
again by you and carried through your brilliant 
and lofty poem in the arms of your imagination. 

Was my dream a premonition of the pleasure 





Oliver Wendell Holmes 

















&?sx^y "^^--<2-^?^ 


/f^t £s&?^^-*Cy£> Y^C£^V sYz^Zf Y-Y£Z^~Y* 


jf £c^-C<^e^ y YY^/YyscsY 

Y/ ' / 




cy 7 ^ ^Cc+^e <?Z^y' ^J2^ ^ . c 2^ J^JL^ 
£-r ^C*t*- ZzZZc4u~^- <&~c^L 

- ?£j {ZZy^c^u-*' t?Y £ 2>C*— J^t 




iv v>. 




^ZC—Q-te^Cds *— 








a^-<p 


Y?6L£& yY&£^Cc**yY Z^a^Yo^ /c^2Y^Y £^- 

/^-cP / 'Y a Pc^ &>Axu^ ? 

A^</'y^- Ze^*-*- ■ Z^ZZ <?&ess*-- 

Z \ 

y^Zt^' Z&^Z' Ot&Z-&ZcuY ' 

Y^YYne+yS JzYZZ^^'PZ^-r 


} ! 



Last page of A. L. S. (2 pages) of Oliver Wendell Holmes to Bayard Taylor, September 1, 1875 










Smerican authors 


263 


awaiting me? I have had pleasant waking hours with 
you but I do not remember ever dreaming about you 
before. The coincidence seemed to me too curious 
to pass unnoticed. 

Always truly yours, 

0 . W. Holmes 

Another letter of the Autocrat may be 
given here, although it is not to Taylor but to 
Francis H. Underwood, the assistant editor of 
the Atlantic Monthly during the first two 
years of its existence, and later the successor 
of Bret Harte as consul at Glasgow; he was 
a man of fine literary sense and critical skill, 
whose published writings, refined and schol¬ 
arly, lacked the qualities which insure fame 
and popularity. The novel referred to in the 
letter was a story of Kentucky life, called 
Lord of Himself. 


296 Beacon St. 

June 17th 1874. 

My dear Mr. Underwood— 

It seems so like old times to find you writing stories 
again that I felt fifteen years younger when I took 
up your book which you were so kind as to send me. 
I commonly thank my friends before reading their 
works,—once in a while after finishing them. But 
while I am in the midst of your story no less than 



264 Gambles in Hutoorapb Xanb 


sixty manuscripts of twenty pages more or less each, 
students’ examination books, are tumbled in upon me 
and must be immediately attended to. I cannot 
wait any longer without thanking you for your kind¬ 
ness in remembering me and assuring you of the 
interest with which I am following your characters 
through the incidents which you know so well how 
to manage, and in seeing through your eyes a manner 
of life of which I have only once had a brief glimpse 
with my own. 

I cannot help flattering myself with the idea that 
I see how things are coming out, and I shall be very 
much disappointed if the right young man does not 
come by his own and get the right girl before I come 
to Finis. I think I can see that much of what you 
delineate is a genuine study from life—a strange life 
enough for us New Englanders to contemplate but 
as real as a New Hampshire farmer’s. 

I lay down your novel reluctantly to take up the 
first of this frightful heap of manuscripts and if when 
I take it up again I find you have treated any of my 
friends unfairly—of course the best thing you could 
do with poor old “ Milly ” was to send her to a better 
world—I shall call you to account. An author must 
remember that the children of his brain are real to other 
people, and treat them accordingly. I think I can trust 
you with your offspring but I must wait and see. 
With a thousand thanks and kind remembrances, I am 

Faithfully yours— 

O. W. Holmes 

Mark Twain’s note to Taylor is not of 
much literary interest, but it has a Twainish 








Samuel Langhorne Clemens 

From the engraving by T. Cole after the painting by A. H. Thayer 






First page of A. L. S. of Samuel Langhorne Clemens to Bayard Taylor, undated 











Last page of A. L. S. of Samuel Langhorne Clemens to Bayard Taylor, undated 














American Authors 


265 


ring and it affords a glimpse of one of his best 
traits, a fondness for young people and a 
disposition to contribute to their amusement 
and instruction. 


Hartford, Wednesday— 

My dear Mr. Taylor: 

Good—shall look for you 31st. I think I told 
you I was a sort of father to our Young Girls’ Club 
here & asked you to give them an hour’s talk, or read 
one of your poems to them in my house some time. 
They are charming lasses of 16 to 20 yrs. old. They 
number something over a dozen. Boyesen, Harte, 
Fields, Warner & I have talked to them & Howells 
and Hawley have promised. Can you stay over & 
entertain them Saturday morning? Or Friday morn¬ 
ing if you can’t spare so much time? N. Y. train 
does n’t leave here till afternoon. I hope you can 
& will. 

Yrs truly, 

S. L. Clemens 

When Hiawatha appeared, Taylor wrote to 
Longfellow and made what Higginson calls 
“the best single encomium on the book,” 
saying, “the whole poem floats in an atmos¬ 
phere of the American ‘Indian summer.’ ” 
Longfellow’s letter shows that he sent to 
Taylor advance sheets of The Divine Tragedy , 
which was not published until December 12, 



266 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


1871. The amiable Taylor may have ex¬ 
pressed a “generous judgment’’ about it, but 
it was a dull and tedious performance, and 
the Christus , of which it constitutes the first 
part, and which appeared as a whole in 1872, 
was not a work on which rests the fame of its 
author; although we learn from his diary and 
from his biographies that he had been absorbed 
in it during many years and that it was his 
own favourite. It is worthy of notice that 
two personages as unlike as Longfellow and 
Jackson, the learned and scholarly professor 
and the rough and unlettered soldier, should 
have been troubled by the spelling of sub¬ 
stantially the same word, for General Jackson 
writes “dificulty” and Longfellow “dificult.” 


Cambr. Nov. 23, 1871. 

My Dear Taylor— 

I have to-day received your letter of Sunday, and 
hasten to thank you for your generous judgment of 
my new book. It is, I assure you, extremely gratify¬ 
ing to me; and makes me feel that I have not wholly 
failed in treating a rather dificult [sic] subject. 

By to-day’s post I send you the Interludes and 
Finale, connecting and completing the whole work, 
presuming that Osgood told you something of my 
plan, and that this new book is only the First Part of a 





Henry Wadsworth Longfellow 

From the engraving by S. Hollyer 



O^j 0 Jw - ^ (\SL*JQ^9 * 

t <A. ^/vaAAjUa. 

}^q A^ aaAJ / «^>-lA^/ 


. 4 


c^(K^p>ro v^A i. <y-y — 

JUv<^/C . A , 3 oat. 

yU 


3 

, iLel^ 


r^yu*, f l^kKaZ-, «l 5L_^ c^ «i^<| V 
fwvoy ■, **» ^ lv ^* >l 

oM^ A^o e /\yyJ3 t. 


A 


/y-t^jSyjL^I 

'JJ^fljL 


First page of A. L. S. of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow to Bayard Taylor, November 23, 




Last page of A. L. S. of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow to Bayard Taylor, November 

23, 1871 








Hmerican authors 


267 


work, of which the Golden Legend and the New 
England Tragedies are the Second and Third; and 
which, when the three parts are published together, 
is to be entitled “Christus.” This is a very old 
design of mine, formed before the Legend was written. 

The “Introitas” belongs to the book as a whole; 
and its proper pendant or correlative is not the 
“Epilogue” of this first part, but the “Finale,” 
which I Send you to-day. This will explain the 
seeming want of proportion and balance which you 
have noted. 

With kind remembrances to your wife, who is 
always most kindly remembered by all of us, 

Yours faithfully, 

Henry W. Longfellow 

From Lowell’s letter I am obliged to omit 
the Latin quotation because I cannot make 
it all out and I am not sufficiently familiar 
with Seneca to supply the illegible words. 
Lowell’s handwriting had a fair appearance 
but, like Mirabeau’s, was more pleasant to 
look upon than easy to decipher. The war 
to which he alludes was, of course, the Franco- 
Prussian. 

Elmwood, 24th August, 1870. 

My dear Taylor— 

The passage you ask about is from Seneca. . . . 
I should be very glad to refresh my very agreeable 
memories of Chester County & its kindly people 




268 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


after an interval of (bless me!) a quarter of a century 
—but I fear it is quite out of the question at present. 
I think it would be an excellent thing for Mr. Hughes 
to do & shall advise him accordingly. How long 
he will stay with me or when he will come I know not. 
The newspapers always know more of our affairs 
than ourselves. I am glad to hear that your Faust 
is coming so soon. I doubt not it will do you & us 
honor. The next time you are so near, remember 
that it is always cool in my library. I allow no 
contemporary heats to enter there. 

Always very truly yours, 

J. R. Lowell 

Pray make my remembrances acceptable to Mrs 
Taylor, who must be feeling proud of her countrymen. 
But what an awful war! 

When John Lothrop Motley wrote the fol¬ 
lowing letter to Adam Badeau, he had just re¬ 
tired from the Austrian mission after a serious 
unpleasantness with the Johnson Adminis¬ 
tration, and General Grant was President 
elect. In all probability, after his disagree¬ 
able experience with the incoming Administra¬ 
tion two years later, when he retired from the 
English mission, he would not have expressed 
himself so admiringly about Grant. Without 
discussing the rights and wrongs of his differ¬ 
ences with his home government, we may be 




•? 










James Russell Lowell 






















& M ^JL 


ISSyO. 


//ly i/c tu 





JL ^t a.^A^ yp* /Loj^i, 

zknj » JC/mIs,) 

J tflirtiJ} 9)r/i) fo/Trzjt 

4, j& f>i^cr/^_ 

Cnt^rtv^K. fofT^c^O^Lj-Cs . 

Tc-^rcjA hv£ tfcy <Zy^zJJ > hu^irn^o // 

Cbj/t, V l£- 

** a fc*/ ^ ^ .y A pu^£r v? 

r - LS J jLs -^ „ 

y ^ /^Uu^&Tjt^ £$- /drc&£*J^ J} 

JLU / »«a& L ^ 

£L (?£crr$+*>-+^y ^jftr>o £pyt<y & /cJL 


First page of A. L. S. of James Russell Lowell to Bayard Taylor, August 24, 1C70 












flicf l&JP tot* PC £ &^A 

) /uanJ U+P • '$*- A£<J-pf?a^Linr oJc^ay^ 

fu. W )icrt~l tj jffcu* 0Uffe/diJ. 


J 6^ 0^9 £ Julav 9fbiPf~ L 


f " ^ 

to & 7r^ P»%.^ fa Jzr&m , J^*x 


7/UaP 

fttP P triA. Qv ^ Pn-^a-f'. 

%i fu*ff fos^e. Jjy^ <2sz J2 A&t^r 
^C4H-& in-^Pv ^ Sq 

K PlpA. fj • 9 /Lpf&%s Xo $>>i 

Lj; tr f~£i tfiZ . ' ' 


fcuj&ye ^ $tL/^ ^iud 


Prey h.*A 
teuji/zM 
Aw/ A 

UOot^Jryyfx e^ 

Imu ! 



?c*K fifZL*(3c4 

^ - *£ 

-wf yfarfi} ^ £f 

■ ffkrf’ AlhP^j 4*<_ AUjP.fi 

-v.4 / / 



Last page of A. L. S. of James Russell Lowell to Bayard Taylor, August 24, 1870 





Hmerican authors 


269 


permitted to doubt whether he was fitted to 
represent the United States at a foreign court 
during those uneasy times. Diplomatic 
positions were once regarded as eminently 
suited for literary men, possibly because 
authors were supposed to be unfit for any 
other kind of public office; and it may be that 
they are well enough adapted to the work 
when there is little to be done except to be 
graceful, scholarly, and courteous, to attend 
high social functions, and to say a few appro¬ 
priate words at banquets. But they are apt 
to be sensitive and impracticable and in times 
of stress they are surely out of their element. 
Motley had a fine sense of superiority over 
the vulgarians who ruled at Washington but 
he did not possess enough tact or adaptability 
to conceal it; and moreover he seemed to 
lose his Americanism, which is a bad thing 
for an American minister to lose. One who is 
acquainted with his personal life and char¬ 
acteristics may well wonder that the favourable 
consideration of Mrs. General Grant should 
have flattered him so greatly; but then there 
may have been hopes of another foreign 



270 Gambles In autograph Xanb 


mission, and a quarrel with Andrew Johnson 
was not a bad recommendation to Ulysses S. 
Grant. I am doubtful whether Mrs. Grant 
devoted much time to the perusal of the “Ad¬ 
dress” to the New York Historical Society, if 
he ever sent her a copy; and truth to tell, I 
do not blame her if she did not read it at all. 

2 Park Street, Boston, 24 Dec. ’68. 
My dear General Badeau :— 

Your kind note of 28 Nov. has remained unanswered 
until now, because I have been absent from home 
during the last twelve days. I had the privilege 
of making General Grant’s acquaintance during his 
visit to Boston, of meeting him at dinner time & on 
other occasions, & I shall not permit myself to say 
more than to express the hope that he liked Boston 
only half as well as Boston was delighted with him. 
In that case we shall all be deeply gratified. Massa¬ 
chusetts is sometimes thought a cold place but I am 
sure he must have found it glowing towards him. 

I had hoped to make a brief visit to Washington, 
after my engagements in New York were fulfilled 
but we have always kept Christmas faithfully in our 
family & as this is the first anniversary of it for a long 
time that I could be with them all, I am obliged to 
postpone my visit until about the middle of January 
& I have just written to Mr. Hooper to this effect. 

I was very much flattered that Mrs. Grant honored 
me so much as to wish the letter which I recently 
wrote to you. 





\ 


John Lothrop Motley 









































* 























































* 















































































































































































































































JL / b 

cr~> Airv, 

Z4 3t<. 6 <p 

' ej — i *-^L ^3 <$L 

c/ 7 X<r </^vv. 

<>*^<U\s)hrt-r~*Ji^ u^xfi C suTkj , 

^ -^W *»*, 
W 3^ «r. ^ x 9. 

d/ / 




4 <w ~< 7 

A ~'7 ^ 'S~zO»>a^ - 

4 "“t7 ^ ^ ®--*> ^ 4. 

V W ^ **y ^ 

^ Z^_ At _v/ 

deJ %L ^ 

^O/Sa, tAv.6 X yy 

*, ^ ** *-A 

**’•'• <*. 4=^- ■ ^ 

/ V vA^^£< jJj 

c^ a 4. 


First page of A. L. S. (4 pages) of John Lothrop Motley to General Adam Badeau, 

December 24, 1868 












Hmerican authors 


271 


As she is kind enough to take an interest in what 
I write or speak will you say that I shall ask leave to 
send her a copy of the Address which I made last week 
before the N. York Historical Society—so soon as 
it is published in pamphlet form. The report in the 
New York papers has many omissions—in some 
cases strangely perverting the sense. 

Of course I shall have the honor of sending it to 
General Grant also—as well as to yourself. I think 
it will be ready early in January. 

I hope that you are making steady progress with 
your History & that you will not be afraid of making 
it too long. 

I really think that you ought to have two more 
volumes for the Military History—for your subject 
expands in interest & importance with every step in 
advance. But pray dont think me intrusive in 
offering advice on matters concerning which you are 
a far better judge than I can be. Wishing you a 
merry Christmas & happy new year & asking you to 
convey those sincere wishes to General & Mrs. Grant, 
I remain 

Very sincerely yours, 

J. L. Motley 

Brig Genl Adam Badeau, U. S. A. 

Almost all who write of the personality 
of Hawthorne dwell upon his disposition to 
be solitary, and give the impression that he 
was averse to the society of his fellow-men; 
but while he was undeniably shy and self- 



272 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


distrustful, he was not devoid of geniality 
and could be a most delightful companion. 
Like most men of delicate minds and a dis¬ 
position to muse and to ponder, he did not 
enjoy miscellaneous company and the tedious 
banalities of what Donald Mitchell calls 
‘‘pre-arranged social gatherings.” In Julian 
Hawthorne’s biography of his father a letter 
is quoted in which he says: “I do wish these 
blockheads, and all other blockheads in this 
world, could comprehend how inestimable 
are the quiet hours of a busy man—especially 
when that man has no native impulse to keep 
him busy—but is continually forced to battle 
with his own nature, which yearns for seclu¬ 
sion (the solitude of a mated two) and freedom 
to think and dream and feel.” When in the 
company of those with whom he could shake 
off his natural diffidence and exaggerated 
modesty, he gave no indication of being a 
misanthropical recluse. Many men who have 
his strong aversion to bores have more skill 
in concealing it, and acquire a reputation for 
what is termed “sociability” because they 
are not frank enough to own how much they 








Nathaniel Hawthorne 

From a copper print 






























































































^/Zt 


/j^.- 
7 

—6(^/ 

^y^i <£ '»f~ /-* ^ ^ 1 ~ 

«-- <J” «■ /f-*™--£ ‘7^f > * * * y r ^ 

(7 ^. l^C~j & °-~~~ -=' 5 " - 

/^-t. «*~-^ ^ ^ ^ 

_J ^ 2—^ —V £ ~-^S A- 

£-^-4/ £~~-C _^ ^ <=-'-' «- 

r ■*- 




A 

f 

^ 


^4~-* 




- ^77 

/ 






- ^-c^£ 


A. L. S. of Nathaniel Hawthorne, December io, 1850 






Hmerican Hutbors 


273 


are bored by that worthy, estimable but 
generally uninteresting person known as “the 
average man.” One of my Hawthorne letters 
does not bear out the notion that he was 
invariably exclusive and inhospitable. He 
writes: 


Lenox, December, 1850. 

My dear sir: 

I am gratified that you think me worth biographiz¬ 
ing; and as soon as I get a book off my hands, I will 
see what I can do towards your purpose. You will 
not find it a life of many incidents. I could wish 
(not for the first time), that I were personally knowm 
to you, and could impart the requisite materials from 
one comer of the fireside to the other. 

Very truly yours, 

Nath. Hawthorne 

I have never thanked you for the Optimist. The 
book has been a great pleasure to me, and is so still. 

One of my letters of that charming man 
whose light and graceful poems endear him 
to all lovers of melodious verse but who 
surely deserves to be best remembered by the 
Story of a Bad Boy , was written to General 
George P. Morris of “ Woodman Spare that 
Tree” celebrity, the friend and associate of 
Willis, editor of the New York Mirror and of 


18 





274 IRambles in autograph Xanfc 


the Home Journal , the encourager of literary 
neophytes in the middle nineteenth century 
days. The year of its date is not given, but 
it must be quite an early letter, for Morris 
died in July, 1864, when Aldrich was not 
quite twenty-eight. So shadowy has become 
the fame of Morris, once a shining light in the 
little firmament of New York, that a year 
or two ago a pleasant writer, in describing the 
neighbourhood of Cold Spring, where the 
large-hearted editor had his home, “ Under¬ 
cliff, ” [within my recollection as well-known 
as “Idlewild” or “Sunnyside, ”] spoke of the 
title of “General” as having been won by 
service in the Civil War, whereas it was only 
a militia title conferred in the time when 
military honours were achieved on the peace¬ 
ful parade-ground or the busy stretches of 
Broadway. 

Thursday Evening, July 26th. 

To Gen. Geo. P. Morris. 

Dear Sir— 

I send you a trifle which you can use at your 
discretion and leisure, after you have disposed of 
rhymers more anxious than I to catch Fame and Time 
by the forelock. Speaking of time, it robs us of many 





\y oiwt 


Thomas Bailey Aldrich 

From a steel engraving 
























* 
























* 





















































































First page of A. L. S. (2 pages) of Thomas Bailey Aldrich to General George P. 

Morris, July 26, no year 







































































• \ 



























































































. 

















































































































































Hmerican authors 


275 


a jewel; but there is one thing it shall not take away 
from me —the memory of the few pleasant moments 
I passed with you a while since. I feel the pressure 
of your hand in mine yet; I think it will linger there 
always, the same as your songs have warmed my 
heart for many a year. May God bless you, sir. 

Yours truly, 

T. B. Aldrich 

Shortly before Charles Farrar Browne set 
off for England, where he gained so much 
celebrity but whence he was destined never 
to return, he seems to have abandoned tem¬ 
porarily his famous “show” with its respect¬ 
able “snaix” and distinguished kangaroo— 
“ an amoosin little cuss ”—and to have become 
interested in some mining venture, a result 
possibly of his experience in the land of the 
Mormons. He writes: 


Feby 4— ’66. 

Dear H— 

I saw Jim Wilder at Portland the other day, and 
he referred me to a party in Boston, who is in the mine 
business. Besides Wilder, who knows, says it is 
getting played out in N. Y. while Boston, on the 
contrary, presents a fresh unploughed field of green¬ 
horns anxious to be auriferously fleeced. He wrote 
the party (whose name I think is Graham—a lawyer) 
and will communicate with me at once. I shall be 



276 IRambles in Hutoorapb Hanb 


in N. Y. before May ist. I am anxiously waiting 
a reply to my last note to you. 

Yours ever, 

A. Ward 

Close by a little fragment of a note for the Dic¬ 
tionary reposes a letter written by Noah Web¬ 
ster in a bold and legible hand which gives no 
indication that the pen was guided by a man 
past eighty-four, only three months before the 
close of his life. The connection between “me- 
lasses, ’ * as he calls it, and the birth of a Dauphin 
is not quite apparent; he was evidently jotting 
down for a friend a few of his reminiscences. 


New Haven, Feby 20, 1843— 

Sir— 

When I was traveling to the South in the year 1785, 
I called on General Washington at Mount Vernon. 
At dinner, the last course of dishes was a species of 
pan-cakes which were handed round to each guest, 
accompanied with a bowl of sugar & another of 
melasses for seasoning them, that each guest might 
suit himself. When the dish came to me, I pushed 
by me the bowl of melasses, observing to the gentle¬ 
men present that I had enough of that in my own 
country. The General burst out with a loud laugh , 
a thing very unusual with him; Ah, said he “there is 
nothing in that story about your eating melasses in 
New England.” There was a gentleman from Mary- 








Noah Webster 

From a steel engraving 






































































y Z*> /J?y3 


'/hL 


/U >7 


> 


J, >x<. 





/Jt 


s?SJ\ 




/£* &*/-c*wl*. 

r/ ,^ 

^r £&-<- 7 y v^ ^ • z / / 

■ '/u~,/ks 7**^ ^7 

/U S>^A c<~~r<Z ~-c. S/^AST 

4> /Z-<- 



*yf ^/IcX^-fr ^ 1, iT^i & 7 




„/ /%<-*/ f y SK~? 

rty. u 

6rJ2Z-<7- A > * rAA y ~7 . ^ 

/ . . / «^ ruM~ y ~ fcS'S£?y 

/U^ ; s/a;j«~> ^ £y^Z>\A~~ 

<^z~y r7uc ^y. ? ^ 

* r^-y. r yy^ Zf&y. •**-, ^ D —y /u 

fcSr^'sy 7“ *-**?~», ^ ^ 

*7 n*~>-, /U 


/U*^ -V —' 

^ <^-A' /7 ~^ /W ' 


A, 


y /y^ 




y^vKt<«A 5 ^. 

. - , _^_- yyy~ ?~c<^'T>~£*^£Ze^j*s»y i±sc~* f * ^yj*?- , 

c*-*-c*i c^yf /faz^/yi^** >t^Co*r >^<_ ^-cTfrft <y it £/£&<■-<-'M < 3fl^3-n^ t _4 
/t^+r 7-is<, £<y y. //^ /£+-//t £*-*-< , 

fur~zT?ti A^ a-n^'S-e^yy >»-* *5 <^-^u-c. tcZrruy /*- <s? t SZc At// 


First page of A. L. S. (2 pages) of Noah Webster, February 20, 1843 




































































Hmerican Hutbors 


277 


land at the table, & the General immediately told a 
story, stating that during the revolution a hogshead 
of melasses was stove in West Chester by the over¬ 
setting of a wagon, & a body of Maryland troops being 
near, the soldiers ran hastily & saved all they could 
by filling their hats or caps with melasses. 

Near the close of the revolutionary war, I think 
in 1782, I was at West point when the birth of a 
dauphin in France was celebrated by the American 
troops at that place. The troops were arranged in a 
line along the hills on the west of the camp on the 
point & on the mountains on the east side of the 
Hudson. When the order was given to fire, there 
was a stream of firing all around the camp rapidly 
passing from one end of the line to the other, while 
the roar of cannon, reverberated from the hills, 
resounded among the mountains, & thousands of 
human voices made the atmosphere ring with a song 
prepared for the occasion, A Dauphin's horn. This 
was a splendid exhibition, closed with a handsome 
repast under a long arcade or bower, formed with 
branches of trees. I have never seen any account of 
this celebration in print. 

N. Webster 

One more letter may be given; not because 
of any great literary reputation of the writer, 
but because it shows the unbecoming itching 
for the Presidency of which Chief-Justice 
Chase was the victim and the petty and 
trifling methods he adopted to obtain a 




278 IRambles in autograph Xant> 


nomination. Grant, who had never voted 
for any candidates not Democratic, w^as 
certain to be the Republican nominee, and 
Chase, who had been a Republican since that 
party was organised, had a hope of being put 
forward by the Democrats. As is not unusual, 
the matter of political principles was a minor 
one. Halpine was a hanger-on in newspaper 
offices, with a facile pen and no principles to 
speak of. He made a little fame during the 
rebellion as the author of some feebly humor¬ 
ous verse over the nom de plume of Miles 
O’Reilly; conducted a weekly newspaper in 
New York; and was a vain, rather showy, and 
wholly uninfluential person, who had a keen 
eye for the main chance. This character 
shines through the lines of this epistle; four 
months after it was written Halpine was 
found dead one day, and some weeks earlier 
the Chase “boom” had perished miserably. 

Register’s Office, Hall of Records. 

City and County of New York. 

April i, 1868. 

My dear Chief Justice— 

I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of 
your letter dated the 26th instant, which has just 




Hmerican authors 


279 


come to hand; and thank you very respectfully for 
the same. The points given in it shall be used to 
such advantage as I can put them, in your interest; 
but their source shall be kept as private as you wish— 
indeed, as they would have been without your warning 
of “strictly private” at the top. Let me say that, 
in conversation with Mayor Hoffman half an hour 
ago he expressed his conviction that the Dem c and 
Conservative party “would have” to unite on Chase 
as their only hope of success ”—and this from Hoffman 
is important; as he is only a tube through which more 
important organ-players whistle popular music. 
Certainly the Herald has not been unfriendly to you 
of late—I mean within the past fortnight; as I have 
written nearly all the articles in which your name 
occurred; and I further know Mr. Bennett wishes 
you to be pressed for the Presidency; but he is so 
fitfull and uncertain that I could not bind myself 
for his continuing steadfast to this or any other 
programme. Greeley, I know, for he told me so at 
dinner yesterday week, is deeply chagrined at the 
apparent necessity (“a ‘necessity of bad faith & 
cowardice” was my rejoinder) which makes Grant 
the Radical nominee; for I tell you frankly, and indeed 
have so said in my paper, that as between Chase for 
the Radicals and Pendleton for the Democrats,— 
there are 25000 Democrats in this City alone who 
would vote for Chase,—myself included—That 
Pendleton himself will be nominated, I do not think; 
but the contest will lie in our Convention between 
some equivalent for Pendleton—some man of his 
or similar antecedents & present platform—and 
the more loyal and moderate Conservatives who will 





280 iRambles in Hutograpb lanb 


(I hope) press your name, or some name of your 
equivalent. To win, we must get back the old free- 
soil vote, represented by the Evening Post , (Wm. 
Cullen Bryant and Parke Godwin) in this City, and 
to win back that free-soil Democratic element, your 
name is certainly the most available we have offered. 
With kindest and most respectful remembrances to 
Mrs. Sprague & the Governor, 

Believe me always to remain 
Your obliged friend & servant, 

Chas G. Halpine 

Hon Salmon P. Chase, 

Chief Justice United States. 




CHAPTER XIV 


TWO NEW ENGLAND PHILOSOPHERS 

Two New England Philosophers—Ralph Waldo Emerson— 
Henry D. Thoreau—Autographic “Finds”; Jay, the Fish¬ 
monger—Stock Stories—American Sources—Domestic In¬ 
roads—The American Antiquarian—My Sad Beginning— 
Dickens's Holocaust—Manuscripts—Autographed Books. 

The examples of Emerson and Thoreau in 
this particular collection are not very im¬ 
portant or significant; such value as they 
possess is only autographic. They may serve 
however as texts for some remarks which 
may meet with vigorous dissent, although 
there is reason to believe that not a few agree 
with me; at least some have told me so in the 
strictest confidence. This is what Emerson 
writes—to George William Curtis, probably: 

Concord, 2d Octr. 

My dear sir — 

Thursday 19th will suit us, &, I hope, the 17th is 


282 iRambles in autograph Uanb 


good enough for Taunton. If not, if you must go to 
Taunton on 19th, then Tuesday, 17th, shall suit us, 
in the circumstances. 

With all kind greetings, 

R. W. Emerson 

Mr. Curtis. 

There is nothing inspiring about that; no 
great thought is hinted at, no philosophical 
truth suggested; but it is Emerson, and that 
means much to the collector. There was a 
time when Ralph Waldo Emerson was the 
prophet and the seer of America. He had a 
powerful influence in the primitive days 
before we had emerged from the limitations 
of provincialism, but it has perceptibly 
diminished and he has become almost a 
tradition. He survives in a literary way, 
for he had an artfulness of style and discourse. 
He understood how to veil the expression of 
a thought in a delicate fabric which made 
the commonplace charmingly mysterious and 
he shrewdly refused to engage in argument 
with those who disagreed with him, a method 
not infrequently adopted by the wily who 
know that if you make assertions and heed 



Swo 1Re\x> lEnglanb pbUoeopbers 283 


no objections you are fairly sure of getting 
some one to believe in you. It is significant 
that the man who, in 1838, announced that 
the office of preacher was dying and the church 
tottering to its fall has ceased to maintain his 
power, while the church which he contemptu¬ 
ously rejected has survived his repudiation 
and continues to be a living force. 

It is always easier to say pleasant things 
than unpleasant ones. Those who insist 
upon the duty of “always telling the truth,’’ 
meaning what they happen to regard as the 
truth, irrespective of their capacity to decide, 
are usually very disagreeable people. But 
Emerson could not justly complain of frank¬ 
ness in the expression of views, for he pro¬ 
claimed that “we will walk on our own feet; 
we will work with our own hands; we will 
speak with our own minds.” A critic once 
said of me that I was “never so sure and never 
so offensive as when I was wrong,” meaning, 
of course, when he thought I was wrong. 
But if we hesitate to say what we really think 
for fear that some one will denounce us as 
being wrong, we will say very little. I do 




284 1RambIe0 in Hutograpb Xanb 


not see why we should hide our true opinions, 
however unpopular they may be—that is, 
if we are not “running for office.” The man 
who has such perfect confidence in himself as to 
suppose that his judgments are final, is what 
Mr. Bumble said that, in certain contingen¬ 
cies, the law is; but these judgments may be 
good until reversed by competent authority. 
I do not feel that I am offensive when I say 
that to me, at least, there seems to be little 
sincerity in Emerson’s gospel; and nothing 
endures long in this world that is not sustained 
by sincerity. The lack of it is betrayed in 
strange ways which it is difficult to explain or 
to describe. We have all had the experience of 
listening to a vigorous and eloquent argument, 
commanding admiration, which yet failed to 
convince because we could not resist the feel¬ 
ing that brilliant as the speaker was, there was 
no sincerity behind what he was saying. It 
is easy to suggest that the fault may be in 
the hearer; but even so, the speaker is unsuc¬ 
cessful if he cannot correct that fault. 

Let me plead Emerson’s behest about 
“speaking with our own minds” as some 




Zvoo Bew BSnglanb philosophers 285 


justification for saying that a careful ob¬ 
server, not blinded by the disease of undis¬ 
criminating admiration, must be impressed, 
in considering his life, with the fact that like 
most apostles of individualism, he was dis¬ 
posed to depend upon other individuals and 
to get as much as he could from them for his 
personal benefit without exerting himself to 
any considerable extent outside of the fields 
of rhetoric. Emerson would have cut a 
sorry figure if he had practised literally and 
faithfully his gospel of absolute individualism. 
4 ‘Have no regard to the influence of your 
example, but act always from the simplest 
motives” is one of his precepts. If he meant 
what he said he was advising men to act in 
accordance with the principles of the hyena 
or of the wild men of Borneo, who care nothing 
for their example and who act from the 
simplest of motives. He recalls the sailor in 
Ruddigore who always acted according to the 
dictations of his heart, when it prompted 
him to do just as he wished to do. Another 
of his contributions to the stock of human 
wisdom is: “The great man is he who in 




286 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


the midst of the crowd keeps with perfect 
sweetness the independence of solitude.’' 
This has a pretty sound, but are we to infer 
that the way to greatness is to shut one’s 
eyes in a crowd and think of no one but self? 
At that rate, greatness is cheap. But possibly 
it was meant only as a phrase. 

Mr. Ireland, in his Biographical Sketch , says 
of him, as if it were vastly creditable, that 
“it was a peculiarity in Emerson that the 
thing he most disliked was sickness, while 
disease he regarded with the strongest aver¬ 
sion.” From this astounding revelation we 
are led to suppose that ordinary people are 
fond of sickness—by which Mr. Ireland 
doubtless means “illness”—and regard disease 
with positive affection. Many ardent self- 
lovers are sorely distressed at the sight of 
suffering because it annoys them, disturbs 
their contentment, interferes with their 
personal comfort. It may have been so in 
Emerson’s case, for we must assume that Mr. 
Ireland is not ascribing to him any singularity 
in disliking his own sicknesses and being 
averse to his own diseases. This “peculiar” 




Cwo IRew jEnglanb philosophers 287 


antipathy to the contemplation of illness 
does not appear to have led him to do any¬ 
thing to help the sufferers. In effect, he 
proclaimed the duty of selfishness, the ulti¬ 
mate development of the creed of laziness; 
to that degree he was sincere. After the 
expulsion from Eden he would have used his 
“rich, baritone voice’’ and his subtle phrases 
in advising the stricken pair to gather fig- 
leaves at once, but he himself would have 
sedulously refrained from providing any, even 
for his own protection; he would have bor¬ 
rowed some from Adam. He seems to have 
been afflicted with a sort of constitutional in¬ 
dolence. In his younger days he was the 
pastor of a church, but he gave it up, ostensi¬ 
bly, because of a conscientious objection to the 
rite of the Lord’s Supper; thereby ridding 
himself of an obligation to do systematic 
work and assigning a reason which permitted 
no argument. He might well have placed 
his abdication on the ground that he was not 
fit for pastoral labour; his heart was not in 
it. The dying Revolutionary veteran who, 
it is related, was so dissatisfied with the 




288 TRamblee in Hutograpb Xanb 


4 ‘ consolations ” administered by the philoso¬ 
pher that he rose from his bed saying, “ Young 
man, if you don’t know your business, you 
had better go home,” was an accurate ob¬ 
server. Emerson, by his own showing, 
entered the ministry without any serious 
conviction, although it may be unjust to 
surmise that the pecuniary consideration 
affected his action. One of his admirers 
applies to him the words used by Sir Leslie 
Stephen about himself, that “ he did not dis¬ 
cover that his creed was false, but that he had 
never really believed it.” In Sir Leslie’s case, 
however, the entrance into the ministry was 
largely due to the English customs of his 
day under which a studious youth, not well 
adapted to any other profession and engaged 
moreover in University work, took orders in 
the Church of England. Emerson studied 
theology for six years before he became 
assistant to Rev. Henry Ware in the Second 
Unitarian Church in Boston. To say that 
after all this preparation he became a minister 
without a sincere belief in the creed he pro¬ 
fessed to teach, is discreditable either to his 



ZTwo 1Revo Englanb philosophers 289 


honesty or to his mental capacity. It shows 
a deficiency either in intellect or in moral 
sense, and there was no weakness of intellect. 
The circumstances of his awakening to his 
error are not without significance. Fortu¬ 
nately for him, he had done what many phi¬ 
losophers are wise enough to do—he married 
a wife, of whom it may be said that, like Mrs. 
Pecksniff, “she had a small property.” Upon 
her early demise, in February, 1832, he came 
into the enjoyment of about twelve hundred 
dollars a year, which meant much more then 
than it does now. It may have been merely 
a coincidence, but almost immediately he 
perceived the propriety and advisability of 
abandoning the ministerial function. 

Philosophers are supposed to have a lofty 
contempt for such a sordid thing as property, 
but the matter of his pecuniary profit appears 
to have been perpetually before his mind. 
Pointing to the pride of his orchard, he said: 
“ That apple tree is worth more than my head 
to me. My income from the former is 
greater than the revenue from all my books.” 
That is his reported speech but I own that 




290 IRambles in Butograpb Xanb 


I am suspicious about its verity, for who, 
in a conversation, would use the expression 
“the former” in that way? At one time 
we find him dwelling, not altogether unosten¬ 
tatiously, upon his poverty, alleging that he 
had only a house, a garden, an orchard, 
twenty-two thousand dollars in cash invest¬ 
ments, and an income of about eight hundred 
dollars a winter from his lectures. Under 
the conditions prevailing in New England 
three quarters of a century ago, he was rather 
well off. He had his start with property 
which some one else had toiled for and had 
accumulated for purposes not connected with 
Emerson’s support. 

But he was as content that others should 
have laboured for his profit as he was satisfied 
to have others do the fighting for him, when in 
1861 he said, at the Charlestown Navy Yard: 
“Ah! sometimes gunpowder smells good!” 
That was the true philosophic spirit. He was 
several hundred miles away from the spot 
where gunpowder was burning and apparently 
gave no thought to the suffering and slaughter 
among those who were burning it. 




Gwo mew CnQlanb philosophers 291 


His friends who were ready to break up the 
government of this country to destroy slavery 
had little help or comfort from him until 
their task was nearly accomplished and their 
cause had become popular in New England. 
“ If I work honestly and steadily in my own 
garden, I am making protest against slave- 
labour, ” he said; but if the antagonists of 
slavery had limited their activities to that 
sort of “protest,” slavery would exist to-day 
unless abolished by the voluntary act of the 
slaveholders. It was an easy, comfortable 
kind of protest, mild in its nature, and he 
must have been inefficient in his garden, even 
if honest and steady, since we learn that his 
digging was fraught with danger to his 
philosophic legs. His attitude towards real 
reforms reminds one of the coarse caricatures 
which not long ago filled our newspapers, 
labelled, “Let George do it.” In his address 
on “The American Scholar” in 1837, he said: 
“If the single man plant himself indomitably 
upon his instincts, and there abide, the huge 
world will come round to him.” It may be 
thought that this would depend a good deal 



292 Gambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


upon the nature of the instincts. The 
“huge world” does not trot about to suit the 
varying instincts of millions of mortals. 
Such pseudo-individualism means only sav- 
agery; experience teaches men that sane 
independence is best secured by intelligent 
co-operation. 

In the Century for July, 1882, Emma 
Lazarus paid an elaborate tribute to Emerson, 
boasting that he founded no school, formu¬ 
lated no theory, and “abstained from uttering 
a single dogma.” I do not know what she 
calls a “dogma”; I had an idea that, in its 
general sense, it meant “a fixed opinion,” 
at least that is one of its principal meanings. 
Emerson was going about, writing and speak¬ 
ing, during all his active years, and it is 
dubious praise to say that he never uttered a 
fixed opinion. If that were true, what on 
earth was he talking about? 

The letter of Thoreau is also devoid of any 
intrinsic interest. It was evidently written 
for the information of the head of the 
well-known publishing firm of Wiley & 
Putnam. 




Gwo IRevv Englanb philosophers 293 


Concord, Jan 14, 1847. 


Dear Sir— 

Will you please inform Mr. Wiley that I have 
concluded to wait a fortnight for his answer. As I 
should like to make some corrections in the Mss. in 
the meanwhile, I will thank you if you will send it 
to me by Hamden’s express to Boston and by Adams’ 
to Concord and I will return it in ten days. 

Yrs &c., 

Henry D. Thoreau 


Whether or not the eccentric Mr. Henry 
D. Thoreau may be regarded as a philosopher, 
in a technical sense, he fancied that he was 
one, and he was a devout disciple of the Sage 
of Concord. His views of life and of his 
duties in life were full of the spirit of his 
master. “Local as a woodchuck,” according 
to John Burroughs, he had a literary faculty 
charming to many, but he too was something 
of a poseur and understood the art of self- 
advertisement almost as well as a modern 
“Progressive” statesman. In the words of 
Lowell, he was “a man with so high a conceit 
of himself that he accepted without question¬ 
ing, and insisted on our accepting, his defects 
and weaknesses of character as virtues and 




294 IRamblee in Hutograpb Xant> 


powers peculiar to himself.” He posed as an 
enthusiastic lover and observer of nature; 
but, as Lowell further points out, he was really 
no observer. 

Till he built his Walden shanty he did not know that 
the hickory grew in Concord. Till he went to Maine, 
he had never seen phosphorescent wood, a phenome¬ 
non early familiar to most country boys. At forty, 
he speaks of the seeding of the pine as a new discov¬ 
ery, though one should have thought that its gold- 
dust of blowing pollen might have earlier drawn his 
eye. ... He discovered nothing. He thought 
everything a discovery of his own, from moonlight 
to the planting of acorns and nuts by squirrels . 1 

Burroughs, in his glowing eulogy of him, 
feels obliged to make this admission: 

Considering that Thoreau spent half of each day for 
upwards of twenty years in the open air, bent upon 
spying out Nature’s ways and doings, it is remark¬ 
able that he made so few real observations. . . . He 
has added no new line or touch to the portrait of bird 
or beast that I can recall—no important or significant 
fact to their lives. 

Burroughs easily discerns the reason: he 
had no self-forgetfulness; he was thinking 
more about Henry D. Thoreau than about 


1 My Study Window ( 1871 ), 200 . 




Ewo mew England philosophers 295 


anything else; if he looked into the glass of 
Nature, he could see only—himself. He was 
a monument of egotism. Having neither pur¬ 
pose nor persistency, he regarded, or affected 
to regard, all success as contemptible. 

His hermit-life at Walden has been one 
of his principal ‘‘properties,” as a stage- 
manager might say; but a slight investigation 
discloses how much imposture there was 
about it. The gentle but commonplace 
Donald Mitchell, amiably but convention¬ 
ally flattering to all writers dealt with in his 
American Lands and Letters , expresses the 
general idea when he says of Thoreau at 
Walden that “he built his own house under 
the pines, measuring costs by pennies.” What 
he really did was to avail himself largely of 
the property of others in orthodox philo¬ 
sophical style. He began characteristically by 
“borrowing Alcott’s axe.” He took pos¬ 
session of land belonging to Emerson. He 
procured planks by “dismantling a shanty” 
which he bought from an Irishman—that, 
at least, he paid for. It is true that he per¬ 
formed the work of constructing the cabin, 



296 IRambles in Hutocjrapb Xanb 


having no other occupation and being bent 
on possessing a retreat where he would be 
under no necessity of doing anything for the 
benefit of any one else; but he had the 
help of friends, including Alcott and George 
William Curtis, in “raising” it. He was only 
an amateur hermit, for Channing tells us that 
“he bivouacked there and really lived at 
home, where he went every day, ” the “home” 
being that of his father. Mr. William Morton 
Payne, in his entertaining book, Leading 
American Essayists, while quoting these 
words of Channing, thinks that they were not 
literally true, because, I infer, the “hermit” 
did not go home every day. But it is plain 
that the “cabin” was much like the “desert 
island” we boys used to contrive, back of the 
homestead, or a picnic place of resort of the 
kind much favoured in these times by busy 
men who seek to escape for a brief season the 
daily cares of life. I wish I knew whether 
he ever returned Alcott’s axe. 

For several years he was an inmate of 
Emerson’s house, paying for his support, as 
well as I can make out, by “playing with the 




£wo IRew lEnglanb philosophers 297 


kittens” or teaching Emerson to dig without 
imperilling his lower limbs; and Emerson 
submitted to it meekly, possibly because he 
was incapable of the effort involved in getting 
rid of his non-paying boarder. In 1848, 
Thoreau, at the age of thirty-one, went back 
to the house of his father, the worthy maker 
of lead-pencils, “and remained under the 
family roof for the rest of his life.” 

Thoreau explains the motive of his “her¬ 
mit” masquerade by saying: 

I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow 
of life, to live so sturdily and Spartan-like as to put 
to rout all that was not life, to cut a broad swath 
and shave close, to drive life into a corner and reduce 
it to its lowest terms, and, if it proved to be mean, 
why then to get the whole and genuine meanness of 
it, and publish its meanness to the world; or if it 
were sublime, to know it by experience, and be able 
to give a true account of it in my next excursion. 

He was going to do all this by hiding in a toy- 
hermitage quite near Boston and then writing 
about—himself. It seems to the ordinary 
mind to have a nauseous flavour of absurd 
self-sufficiency; to learn “life” by disregarding 
the existence of one’s fellow-beings, to evade 




298 IRambles in Hutograpb Xanb 


the responsibilities of life, and then to pro¬ 
claim a decision on the whole great subject 
as if it were final and conclusive. To ignore 
our brother-men, to refuse obedience to law, 
.and to defy the rules of decent society may 
be characteristic of the unwhipped schoolboy, 
who usually outgrows such childish diseases 
by the time he assumes the toga of manhood. 

Lowell, in My Study Windows , sums up the 
Walden matter when he says: 

Thoreau’s experiment actually presupposes all that 
complicated civilisation which is theoretically ab¬ 
jured. He squatted on another man’s land; he 
borrows an axe; his boards, his nails, his bricks, his 
mortar, his books, his lamp, his fishhooks, his plough, 
his hoe, all turn State’s evidence against him as an 
accomplice in the sin of that artificial civilisation which 
rendered it possible that such a person as Henry D. 
Thoreau should exist at all. 


Burroughs thinks that Thoreau “had hu¬ 
mour, but it had worked a little; it was not 
quite sweet.” A humour that is sour must 
be a very bad humour; but Burroughs has 
about as much humour as one of his own wood¬ 
chucks, and is not a competent judge. Lowell 
says that “Thoreau had no humour,” and 




Zwo IRew Englanb iPbilosopbera 299 


most of us will regard him as better qualified 
to pass judgment. No great egotist, absorbed 
in self-admiration, ever has any sense of 
humour, for if he had he would not take him¬ 
self so seriously. 

But why should an elderly and inoffensive 
autograph collector (not a king but only a 
commoner too) scold and rail about Emerson 
and Thoreau? They live only in their books, 
and the books cannot be changed; their 
little personal foibles and peculiarities lie 
buried with them. No matter what I may 
say or think of them, some man will be fond 
of them, another will dislike them, and the 
great majority will not think of them at all. 

There is comfort in the fancy that, while 
there are few undiscovered comers of the 
globe to gladden the hearts of geographic 
explorers, there may be mines of autographic 
treasure still hidden and awaiting the approach 
of the enthusiast. In spite of the ravages 
of war and of revolutions and the losses oc¬ 
casioned by ignorance and inattention, there 
must be stores of long-forgotten letters and 




300 IRambles in Butograpb Xant) 


manuscripts which will ultimately be brought 
to light. The knowledge of the pecuniary 
value of old writings has been so widely 
diffused by the aid of the newspapers and the 
activities of the dealers that the possessors 
of these hoards are more likely to over¬ 
estimate than to depreciate their worth in 
the market. Dr. Scott, in his rather dry and 
colourless way, tells of many surprising ‘ ‘ finds, ” 
such as the discovery of the diary of Rev. 
Dr. Campbell, recording his visits to Dr. 
Johnson and forming an interesting addition 
to Boswell’s Life, which was “ behind an old 
press in one of the offices of the Supreme 
Court of New South Wales” in Sydney; but 
there is no known explanation of the mystery 
of its appearance in that strange hiding- 
place. Mr. Edward Jenks, writing from 
Melbourne University, informs us how “in 
that distant quarter of the world he had 
turned up no less a treasure than a manu¬ 
script book of Keats, containing several of 
his poems and his 1 Pot of Basil’ with a new 
verse.” But we must remember that in 
early days Australia was largely populated 




£\\>o 1 Row lEnoIanb philosophers 301 


by exiles from England who had a shrewd idea 
of the value of what Mr. Wemmick called 
“portable property,” without much inclina¬ 
tion to disclose the fact of its possession by 
them or the sources from which it was derived. 

Then there is the story of Sir Robert Cotton 
who found his tailor cutting off, for a measure, 
a strip of parchment which proved to be one 
of the originals of Magna Charta with the 
seals and signatures intact; of Dr. Raffles, 
who bought for one and sixpence, in an old 
bookstore on Holbom Hill, the account of the 
expenses of the execution of Mary, Queen of 
Scots, with an order for their payment signed 
by Cecil, Lord Burleigh, and who procured 
from the files of a printer at Wrexham, North 
Wales, the original draft of Heber’s “From 
Greenland’s icy mountains”; and of the 
man who some seventy years ago found Mr. 
Jay, a fishmonger in Hungerford Market, 
selling soles wrapped in an old folio sheet, 
which led to the discovery of seven tons of 
records—bought by Jay at Somerset House 
for £7 a ton—consisting in part, it is said, of 
documents for the safe-keeping of prisoners 




302 IRamblee in autograph Xanb 


in the Tower from the time of Henry VII to 
that of William III, autograph accounts of 
Nell Gwynne, receipts signed by Wren, 
Dryden, and Sir Isaac Newton, with auto¬ 
graph letters of Cardinal Wolsey to Pope 
Clement VII about the divorce of Henry VIII, 
a manuscript in the hand of Edward VI, 
and a letter of Queen Elizabeth. 

Some of these wonderful histories may not 
however be accepted absolutely in all their 
details. Personally, I feel some doubts about 
those “autograph accounts” of Nell Gwynne, 
since Nell, with all her charms, did not shine 
in the matter of chirography, being barely 
able to make her mark when signing a paper; 
still they were accounts in somebody’s auto¬ 
graph, and one must not be hypercritical. 
Another little touch added to the Jay narrative 
is not reassuring. We are told by Scott that 
“a fire having occurred, it destroyed about 
three tons which Mr. Jay still had unsold.” 
We might suppose that when the “fire” de¬ 
stroyed that lot, it “occurred,” but it is odd 
that in so many of the romantic instances of 
alleged wholesale “finds,” we are always 



Gwo 1Rew £nglanb jpbiloeopbers 303 


pained by learning that a certain specific 
amount of matter has been disposed of by 
some such method of destruction. And how 
came a fishmonger to buy £49 worth of old 
documents merely to use as wrapping paper? 
When did this injudicious fire occur? If before 
the revelation, how did it happen that there 
was so much material left? If after, when its 
value was known, how did these records come 
to be lingering in the perilous precincts of 
Hungerford Market? If there were “ three 
tons still unsold,” there must have been a 
good deal that had been “sold” and not util¬ 
ised for the wrapping up of soles. One feels 
disposed to regard with some suspicion the 
spectacle of the fishmonger engaged in wrap¬ 
ping merchandise in folio sheets “which he 
tore out of a large volume he kept by his 
side.” Could it have been a skilfully devised 
“plant”? A little cross-examination might be 
useful in these circumstances. 

A mysterious association between fish and 
old autographs must exist, as we learn of the 
appearance of the forty years’ correspondence 
between James Boswell and the Rev. W. J. 




304 IRambles in 2lutograpb Xanb 


Temple, in the possession of the proprietor 
of a fish shop in Boulogne. 

After all, most of the accounts of “finds’’ 
are stock stories, repeated again and again 
in English books about autographs, such 
as the discovery of the Fairfax papers in 
a box apparently filled with paving tiles; the 
Thurloe papers, revealed by the accidental 
falling of a ceiling in Lincoln’s Inn; the 
finding by M. Vatel of the love letters of 
Mme. Roland and Buzot, in a shop in a 
Parisian suburban market; the Wedgwood 
records, in an old store in Birmingham; 
Lady Mary Wortley Montagu’s letters in 
a box in a lawyer’s office; the manuscripts 
of Cardinal York, offered for sale in Rome for 
£20; and Sir H. Maxwell Lyle’s exploration 
of a loft at Belvoir—all of these are duly set 
forth in the pages of Scott and of Broadley. 
Doubtless there are many dealers who could, 
if they would, thrilling tales unfold, but for 
obvious reasons they are not inclined to 
unfold them. It would not be good “busi¬ 
ness” to encourage in prospective buyers a 
feeling of rosy hope that new autographic 




Cwo mew jEnglanb philosophers 305 


El Dorados are to be opened by a mere 
amateur. 

Naturally the opportunities for wholesale 
discoveries of autographic deposits in this 
quarter of the world are not so abundant as 
they are in the older countries. Most of us 
know the tale of Mr. Tefft and the paper 
blown about the lawn, and I have told else¬ 
where the story of the barrel of Benjamin 
Franklin writings rescued some years ago by 
a lady visitor at a house near Philadelphia. 
There may be a few storehouses undisturbed 
in the Southern States, which have survived 
the destruction caused by the Civil War, 
but even those will probably be of no serious 
importance. 

No one knows, of course [says a recent writer 1 ], how 
many precious documents bearing the signature of 
Washington, Lee, or Henry were used to light the 
fires, or “stop a hole to keep the wind away.” It 
is a fact that a good Virginia housekeeper kept the 
mould out of her preserves with covers cut from George 
Mason’s letters. At a time and a place where paper 
was scarce, we can imagine how great a temptation it 
was to ransack the garret for needed scraps. . . . 
We are sorry that preserves were so much liked in old 

1 The True Patrick Henry, p. 286. 


20 




306 IRantbles in autograph Xanb 


Virginia, and we are glad to have certain letters that 
corroding time has left us. 

Forty years ago and more there was in 
New York a little quarterly publication called 
The American Antiquarian , conducted by 
Mr. Bums, which had a short and precarious 
existence. A few of the old numbers were 
given to me lately by a generous friend in 
Buffalo, and they have a genuine if pathetic 
interest. In the first article of the first 
number (May, 1870) there is a brief chapter 
on autographs in which the writer laments 
over the destruction of “thousands of tons 
of valuable matter,” and says: 

Much has been asserted, and more conjectured, as 
to the historical matter destroyed in the South by 
the license of soldiers, but those who have had even 
a glimpse of the piles of manuscript, the accumulations 
of centuries, drawn from garrets by the high prices 
paid for old paper at the North during the war, are 
prone to believe that more of value was turned into 
the hoppers of paper-mills than exists to-day in all the 
public and private collections of both North and South. 
In any event the period of the late war may be con¬ 
sidered as an era in the vandalism of MSS., and the 
gap made by it can never be refilled. . . . There 
may be much valuable matter still in the hands of 




Cwo IRew Cnolanb ipbilosopbers 307 


those who appropriated it at the South and are indis¬ 
posed to exhibit their booty, but as yet little has 
publicly appeared from that source. 

We read of the Harrison papers at Chan¬ 
tilly, Virginia, which were thrown in bulk 
from the garret to make room for a hospital, 
and of the burning of many of them by 
ignorant soldiers. But the sacrifice of auto¬ 
graphic material has not been confined to the 
South. Dr. Parsons found the remains of the 
Pepperell papers rotting in an outhouse and 
the purchaser of Johnson Hall, at Johnstown, 
N. Y., discovered many of those of Sir William 
Johnson in like condition. 

One feature of the American Antiquarian 
is the list of prices prevailing at the time, 
and it is disheartening to the long-suffering 
collector of the present. We observe, for 
example, a war letter (L. S.) of Washington 
for $10; a fine folio of Benjamin Franklin 
for $15; a three-page quarto letter of Joseph 
Hewes (July, 1776!) for $25 (a Hewes letter 
is rated now at $100); a three-page letter of 
Dickens to G. P. R. James for $3;—but to 
prolong the catalogue would be too painful. 




308 IRambles in autograph Xan& 


Returning to the destruction of autographs, 
I have a sad and vivid recollection of the 
fate of my first autographic possession. It 
was a written order of General E. Kirby 
Smith, C. S. A., brought home by my father 
when he returned in 1863 from the Cumber¬ 
land Gap campaign. I had an undefined 
impression at the time that it had been 
wrested by my sire from the Rebel warrior 
in personal combat. Later I added to it a 
letter of General John A. Dix, which elevated 
my solitary specimen to the dignity of a 
collection. In due course they were offered 
up by a dear old feminine devotee of the 
preserve jar and the gingerbread pan, upon 
the domestic altar; a proceeding which sus¬ 
pended my collecting mania for about a quar¬ 
ter of a century. 

One of the most heartrending tragedies 
recorded in modern history is the burning by 
Charles Dickens of all his accumulated letters 
and papers of twenty years when he resumed 
his residence at Gad’s Hill in i860. The 
unpardonable act was performed in an open 
field, where, the criminal perpetrator of the 




Zxvo IRew England philosophers 309 


outrage says, ‘‘they sent up a smoke like 
the genie when he got out of the casket on the 
seashore; and as it was an exquisite day when 
I began, and rained heavily when I finished, 
I suspect my correspondence of having over¬ 
cast the face of the heavens.” Strangely 
enough, he seems not to have noticed the 
obvious fact that heaven was weeping over the 
wanton sacrifice. ‘‘This,” says Mr. Kitton, 
in Dickens in Pen and Pencil , ‘‘is probably 
the most valuable bonfire on record as regards 
the nature of its constituents; it is difficult 
to conceive what sum could be obtained at 
the present time by the disposal of such an 
extensive collection of autographs, which 
must have had a remarkable literary value 
as well as a pecuniary one.” Dickens justi¬ 
fied himself on the ground that he was ‘‘daily 
seeing improper uses made of confidential 
letters, on addressing them to a public audi¬ 
ence that has no business with them.” But 
there must have been a very infinitesimal 
part of the correspondence so deadly as all 
that, and the danger was negligible. Dickens’s 
own letters about his separation from his 




3io iRambles in Hutograpb Xanfc 


wife, which he himself “addressed to a public 
audience that had no business with them,” 
were far more unfit for the public than any of 
those which he destroyed could possibly have 
been; and it would have been no great task 
to protect the sanctity of the burned letters 
so long as such protection was needed. An 
indignant writer in the Antiquarian utters a 
plaintive wail over the holocaust, which is 
too diffuse for quotation. By some freak 
of fate, the manuscripts of Dickens’s books 
have been unusually well preserved, most 
of them having been given to John Forster, 
who left them as a legacy to the South Ken¬ 
sington Museum. The manuscript of Our 
Mutual Friend became the property of G. W. 
Childs, and was by him bequeathed to the 
Drexel Institute in Philadelphia, although 
the South Kensington authorities offered 
£1200 for it; the Christmas Carol , given to 
Thomas Mitton, went to America for a price 
of £2000; and the manuscript of The Haunted 
Man in some way disappeared. 

When we think of the enormous values 
placed upon the manuscripts of distinguished 




$wo IRew 2Snglanb philosophers 311 


authors, we cannot escape a feeling of despair 
over the destruction of so many. I have 
never forgiven Moore, Murray, and Hobhouse 
for burning the manuscript of Byron’s auto¬ 
biography in 1824, even if Mr. Broadley does 
whisper that a duplicate is supposed to exist; 
but he adds tantalisingly that its present 
whereabouts is unknown. It was a crime, 
whether we regard it from a literary, a bio¬ 
graphical, or an autographic point of view. 
Many manuscripts suffer the fate of Rab 
about which the good Doctor Brown of 
Edinburgh wrote: “I am quite sorry that 
I cannot give you the manuscript of ‘Rab.’ 
Only three days ago I found it in my desk and 
threw it into the waste-basket, and by this 
time it is in ashes and up the chimney.” 
After the printer has finished with them, 
they are apt to be consigned to the rubbish 
heap, unless the writer is peculiarly conscious 
of his merits, or some admiring friend—like 
John Forster—cherishes them fondly, or some 
publisher has an unusual appreciation of 
them. Now that the lordly typographical 
artist disdains to look at anything in the pen 




3i2 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


and ink way, we have fallen into that destitute 
state when we actually buy typewritten 
monstrosities which are vaunted in the cata¬ 
logues as having “numerous corrections by 
the author/’ a sorry substitute for the old- 
fashioned manuscript. Of a somewhat similar 
nature are “authors’ corrected proof sheets,” 
which are not entitled to a place in an auto¬ 
graph collection. I have some myself. Yet it 
is not so long since real manuscripts were as 
cheap as an A. L. S. of a modem novelist. In 
1831 the MS. of Ivanhoe brought £12, that 
of The Abbot £14, and that of Kenilworth 
£18; while in 1889 one page of The Abbot 
was sold in London for £17. 

The autographed book—by which I mean 
a book which once belonged to a man of 
renown and in which he wrote his name, not 
a book with a letter pasted in it—has a greater 
charm, for it blends the autographic element 
with that of personal association. The 
collecting of such books is only a by-product 
of autograph collecting, but I am disposed 
to believe that the average man, not a col¬ 
lector, feels more interest in such a book than 




JLwo 1 Hew lenglanb philosophers 313 


he does in a simple letter. We are all con¬ 
scious of an attraction about the book which 
speaks to us of the former owner in a pecu¬ 
liarly pleasant way. I am fond of my copy 
of The Vicar of Wakefield with “Nathaniel 
Hawthorne, Salem, Mass.” on the flyleaf, 
“Nath. Hawthorne, Bow. Coll. Maine” on 
the title, and divers little notes on the blank 
pages, including these lines, which show that 
like most young men in their college days, 
or later for that matter, Hawthorne was not 
unmindful of “the eternal feminine”: 

When lovely woman stoops to folly 

And finds too late that men betray 

What— 

But there he either forgot the rest of the 
quotation or turned his mind to some other 
subject. There is tender association too in 
the copy of Poe’s Poems dedicated to Mrs. 
Browning, in which is written: “Given to Mrs. 
Benzon—partly on account of the poetry, 
partly on that of the dedication at page 33— 
with all affectionate wishes of Robert Brown¬ 
ing, March 7, 1867.” We look with curiosity 




314 IRambles in Hutograpb Xant> 


on the old Hebrew Grammar (1721) with 
the inscription on the title-page, “Thomas 
Carlyle, 1828”; on Hayley’s Life of Milton, 
with “Gulielmus Cowper, Gulielmus Hayley, 
1796” on the flyleaf and “Wm. Cowper* f 
on the second title, with Cowper’s bookplate; 
on the Elzevir Sallust, with “J. Swift” on 
the title; and on the copy of The Pleasures of 
Hope and other Poems , with an inscription by 
Thomas Campbell: “To his Sister, Mary 
Campbell, from the author. It is almost 
unnecessary to say with what cordial affection 
the giver presents this token of esteem.’* 
I wish that I could have more confidence 
in the large-paper copy of a poem by Ambrose 
Phillips with the signatures of “A. Pope” and 
“H. Walpole.” It seems almost “too good 
to be true,” and while I make no accusations 
against it, I am aware that the reproduction 
of such well-known autograph signatures 
on a page of an old book is not beyond the 
skill of a very ordinary forger, and the en¬ 
thusiast who invests good money in such a 
purchase must suffer at times from melan¬ 
choly scepticism unless he obtains for his 




Gwo ittevv lEnglanb philosophers 315 


precious volume a fairly well authenticated 
pedigree. 

The grave and serious collector who over¬ 
comes his natural reserve sufficiently to write 
about his hobby is much given to dwelling 
on the value of autographs as historical 
memorials and upon their educational im¬ 
portance, anxious to justify to the world his 
fondness for the objects of his fancy. I fear 
that I have not treated the theme with proper 
dignity, and have exhibited a tendency to 
under-statement. Bellenden Ker said of 
Lord Brougham after he was gone, “ There 
is always a foundation of truth in his state¬ 
ments, but he was such a terrible exaggerator.” 
“No, no/’ was Lyndhurst’s comment, “I do 
not admit that. I consider that the worst 
exaggerator is the person who under-states.” 
There may be some truth in Lyndhurst’s 
remark, but in our times there is not much 
disposition towards that sort of exaggeration. 
I have not been consciously guilty of it, but 
I have not felt inclined to imitate a political 
campaign chairman and “claim everything” 



316 IRambles in autograph Xanb 


for the collector; I am content merely to 
ask for him a moderate share of the respect 
which the world gives to those who devote 
themselves to worthy and innocuous pur¬ 
suits. 




INDEX 


Abbot, The, price of manu¬ 
script of, 312 

Abbott (Lord Tenterden), 
Eldon writes of, 222 
Abdul Hamid, Sultan, jewelled 
ornaments of, 25 
Abdy, Journal of Residence 
and Tour in United States, 
etc., by, 89 

Abele, Colonel James, letter, 
from Greene to, quoted, 
243 

Addington, Cranworth speaks 
of, 227 

Ailesbury, Walpole’s letters 
to the Countess of, 135 
Ainsworth, William Harrison, 
letter from Thackeray to, 
quoted, 193 

Ainsworth and His Friends, 
William Harrison by S. M. 
Ellis, 193 

Aitken, Life of Steele by, 162 
Alba A micorum, Milton 
writes, 62 

Albert Edward, Prince of 
Wales, signature of, 103 
Albert, Prince, autograph of, on 
sale, 25 

Alcibiades, supposed letter to 
Pericles from, 42 
Alcott, Thoreau receives help 
from, 296 

Aldersey, Clive sends for, 170 
Aldrich, T. B., letter to Morris 
from, quoted, 274 
Alexander the Great, supposed 
letter to Aristotle from, 42 


All Saints & St. Julian’s, St. 

Leonards writes about, 226 
A. L. S., referred to, 12 
Amazon, reference to, 24 
America, 80 

American Antiquarian Maga¬ 
zine, article about Spring 
published in the, 37; a 
quarterly publication, 306; 
quoted, 306; prevailing 
prices listed in, 307 
American Lands and Letters, 
Mitchell speaks of Thoreau 
in his, 295 

“Among My Autographs” by 
Mendenhall, 87 
Andr6, capture of, 243 
Angoul&ne, watermark on 
paper, 42 

Anne, Queen, days of, 149 
Antient Metaphysics by James 
Burnett referred to, 168 
Appleton, Cyclopcedia of 
American Biography by, 
37 

Aristotle, supposed letter from 
Alexander the Great to, 42 
Arnold, Benedict, letter to 
Governor Clinton from, 
quoted, 243 

Arnold, John H. V., letter to 
author, quoted, 74 
Ashore and Afloat, Cooper, 
146 

Asquith, Mr., autograph of, 
referred to, 22 

Atlay, Mr., J. B., The Victorian 
Chancellors by, 220 

17 



318 


Unbei 


Australia, 80 

Autograph , The , quotation 
from Lowell in, 55 
Autograph Collecting by Dr. 

Henry T. Scott, 47 
Autograph collectors, weak¬ 
nesses of, 28; shrewd bar¬ 
gains of, 29; deceiving of, 
33 ff.; Boswell said to be 
first of, 61; advice to, 99; 
Hutton’s idea of, 129; devices 
of, 174 ff.—Burns, Charles 
De Forest, 109; Cicero, 60; 
Chasles, M., 41; Daniel, 
George, 12; Houghton, 
Lord, 20; Hutton, Laurence, 
93; Mendenhall, Laurence, 
87; Millies, Richard, 20; 
Morrison, Alfred, 19; Pliny, 
60; Raffles, Doctor, 19; 
Riddle, William, 174; Robin¬ 
son, Charles, 174; Rogers, 
Samuel, 104; Simpson, 
Samuel, 124; Sprague, 
William B., 89; Turner, 

Dawson, 16; Upcott, 
William, 16 

“Autograph Cottage,” home 
of William Upcott, 16 
Autograph experts, Mr. Bow¬ 
den, Mr. Burns, and Mr. 
Benjamin, 37 

Autographs of Remarkable 
Personages Conspicuous in 
English History by Nichols, 
48 

Bacon, Lord, Campbell writes 
of, 230 

Bacon, Sir Nicholas, Camp¬ 
bell writes of, 230 
Badeau, General Adam, letter 
from Motley to, quoted, 270 
Balfour, Mr., autograph of, 
referred to, 22; 168 
Balfour’s Reports, MSS. of old 
Sea Laws of Scotland in, 160 
Bancroft, writes of Carleton 
240; letter to Taylor from, 
quoted, 260 ff. 


Bancrofts, the, speak of Byron, 
86 

Bankus, Mr., Burnett’s book 
to be sent to, 168 
Banvard, John, rhyme by, 
quoted, 53 

Beale, Mr., engages Thackeray 
to lecture, 193 

Beattie, Professor, quoted, 144 
Bellingham, Richard, affidavit 
sworn by, 234 

Belvoir, Sir Lyle’s exploration 
at, 304 

Benjamin, Mr., an autograph 
expert, 37; 89, 100 
Bennett, Arnold, reference to, 
5 

Bensley, T., Gray’s poems in 
edition printed by, 136 
Benson, Mr., approves Rus- 
kin’s theory, 5 

Benzon, Mrs., book given to, 
313 

Bernard, Francis, Trevelyan 
writes of, 235; letter written 
by, quoted, 236 ff. 

Bernard, Professor Montague, 
comes to the United States, 
217 

Berry, Miss, 18 

Bethell, Richard, letter to the 
Lord Justice from, quoted, 
229 

Bexley, Lord, autograph of, 
90 

Bigelow Papers by Lowell, 121 
Biographical Sketch , Ireland’s, 
quoted, 286 

Bixby, W. H. f Broadley mis¬ 
spells, 77 

Bliss, Cornelius M., anecdote 
related about, 49 
Bonaparte, Prince Roland, 

opinion of L-B-, 25 

Bookman , The , 3 
Books in Manuscript by Fal¬ 
coner Madan, 11 
Booth, Edwin, wrote about 
Hutton, 130 
Borneo, hunters of, 9 







Unfcei 


319 


Boston, forged pass of Wash¬ 
ington found in, 39 
Boswell, James, spoken of as 
first autograph collector, 61; 
Johnson’s letters published 
in Hill’s edition of, 163; 
correspondence of Rev. W. 
J. Temple and, found, 303 
Bowden, Mr., autograph ex¬ 
pert, 37 

Boyesen, talks to Young Girls’ 
Club, 265 

Boyle, Hon. Robert, forged 
letters from Pascal to, 42 
Braddon, Miss, letter of, 
quoted, 116 

Brazenose College, Mr. Madan 
a Fellow of, 11 

Breton, Cape, to be given up 
by France, 171 

Brewer, value of letter of, 101 
Brewster, Sir David, life of 
Newton written by, 43; 
declares letters forgeries, 43; 
letter of, to Sir Madden 
quoted, 43 

Brick, Mr. Jefferson, his esti¬ 
mate of Lowell, 64 
Bright, John, an admirer of 
the United States, 206; 
Ellenborough writes of, 210; 
letter to Greeley from, 
quoted, 210 

Bristol, England, Gwinnett a 
merchant from, 98 
British Museum, Upcott’s col¬ 
lection bought by, 16; 111 
Broadley, Mr., Chats on Auto¬ 
graphs by, 30, p. 47; writes of 
forgeries, 35; retreat in Eng¬ 
land of, 48; A Practical 
Guide for the Collector by, 
48; refers to Pliny and 
Cicero, 60; quoted, 70; au¬ 
thor at issue with, 76; re¬ 
ferred to, 88, 93, 116 
Brooks, Shirley, Life of, by 
Layard, 200; letter to Doeg 
from, quoted, 201; entry 
from Diary of, 201; model 


autographed note of, quoted, 
202; letter to Artemus Ward 
from, quoted, 203 
Brougham, Lord, referred to, 
90; the most versatile of 
the Victorian Chancellors, 
221; Atlay writes of, 221; 
handwriting of, 223; letter 
from St. Leonards to, quoted, 
226; Bcllenden Ker writes of, 
315 

Browne, Charles Farrar, 203, 
275 

Browning, Robert, 140; book 
given to Mrs. Benzon by, 
313 

Brownson, Orestes Augustus, 
letter written by, quoted, 

83 

Bryant, W. C., Poe writes of, 
64; letter to Tefft from, 
quoted, 121; Century Club 
celebrates birthday of, 260; 
Halpine writes of, 280 
Bryce, Mr., writes of Lowe, 
213; writes of Lowe and 
Disraeli, 216 

Buckle, History of Civilisation 
by, 204; referred to, 284 
Bumble, Mr., referred to, 284 
Bunner, writes to Hutton, 130 
Burdett, Sir Francis, auto¬ 
graph of, 90; suspended 
from the Council, 170 
Burgoyne, General, ink-stand 
belonging to, 114 
Burke, Edmund, notes of 
speeches against Hastings 
by, 19; letter to Miss 
Burney from, quoted, 165 
Burleigh, Cecil, Lord, account 
signed by, 301 

Burnett, James, becomes Lord 
Monboddo, 167; letter to 
Cadellfrom, quoted, 168 
Burney, Miss, Dr. Johnson’s 
“Pretty Fanny,” 164: Cecilia 
and Evelina by, 165; letter 
from Burke to, quoted, 165 
Burns, Charles De Forest, an 






320 




Bums— Continued 

autograph expert, 37, 66; 
forged autograph of, by A. 
H. Smith, 41; skill in buy¬ 
ing of, 109; American Anti¬ 
quarian conducted by, 306 

Burroughs, John, speaks of 
Thoreau, 293, 294; writes 
of Thoreau, 298 

Butler, William Allen, speaks 
of Samuel Rogers, 105; 
handwriting compared to 
Rossetti’s, 151 

Buzot, finding of letters of 
Mme. Roland and, 304 

Byron, Henry James, hand¬ 
writing of, 9; forged letters 
of, 41; letter to autograph 
collector from, quoted, 86; 
the Bancrofts speak of, 
86; letter of, 105; demands 
for autographs of, 140; 
“Oscar of Alva” by, quoted, 
141; price of a poem of, 143 
burning of autobiography 
by, 311 

Byron, Mrs., letter to Caw- 
thorn from, quoted, 143 


Cadell, Thomas, letter from 
Burnett to, quoted, 168 
Caesar, Julius, supposed letter 
from Cleopatra to, 42; re¬ 
ferred to, 114 

Cairns, a Victorian Chancellor, 
221 

Calcutta, Clive returns to, 
169 

Camelford, Lord, referred to 
by Mrs. Siddons, 27 
Campbell, Lord, biographies 
of Chancellors by, 220; 
letter from, quoted, 230 
Campbell,- Rev. Dr., discovery 
of the diary of, 300 
Campbell, Thomas, inscrip¬ 
tion by, 314 

Canada, Smith’s exile to, 21; 
Spring works in, 37 


Cardoyn, Camillus, Milton 
writes in album of, 62 
Carleton, Sir Guy, letter to 
Baron von Riedesel from, 
quoted, 241; resigns as 
Governor of Canada, 241 
Carlyle, Mrs., De Quincey’s 
appreciation of, 186 
Carlyle, Thomas, writes of 
Frederick the Great, 112; re¬ 
ferred to, 179; letter to his 
wife from, quoted, 187 ff.; 
name on flyleaf, 314 
Cato, supposed letter from 
Cleopatra to, 42 
Cawthom, James, letter from 
Byron’s mother to, quoted, 
H3 

Cecil, Lord Burleigh, account 
signed by, 301 

Cecilia by Miss Burney, 165 
Century , tribute to Emerson 
in the, 292 

Century Club, The, Bryant’s 
birthday celebrated by, 260 
Chancellors, Campbell’s bio¬ 
graphies of all the, 220 
Chantilly, Va., Harrison papers 
found at, 307 

“Chapter on Autography” 
by Edgar Allan Poe, 64 
Chase, Salmon, P., letter from 
Halpine to, quoted, 278; 
Chief-Justice of the United 
States, 278 

Chasles, M., swindled by 
Vrain-Lucas, 41; book on 
gravitation by, 42; shows 
forged letter to Academy, 
43 

Chatham, Shelburne in sym¬ 
pathy with, 171; letter writ¬ 
ten by, quoted, 173 
Chats on Autographs by Mr. 
Broadley, 30, 31, 47; quoted, 
70 

Chelmsford, one of the 
Victorian Chancellors, 221 
Childs, G. W., owns a Dickens 
manuscript, 310 










Unfcei 


321 


Oioiseul quoted, 171 

Christian, King of Denmark, 
80 

Christmas Carol , the manu¬ 
script of, given to Milton, 
310 

Cicero, an autograph collector, 
60 

Clarissa, a character in The 
Confederacy , 12 

Clemens, Samuel (M ark 
Twain), letter to Taylor 
from, quoted, 265 

Clement VII, Pope, letters 
from Wolsey to, found, 302 

Cleopatra, supposed letters 
to Cato, Caesar, and Pompey 
from, 42 

Cleveland, Grover, hand¬ 
writing of, 10; autograph 
of, 101 

Clinton, Governor George, 
letter from Arnold to, 
quoted, 243 

Clive, Robert, Baron of Plas- 
sey 169; letter to Pybus 
from, quoted, 169 

Cobden, Richard, letter to 
Riddle from, quoted, 178; 
a United States admirer, 
206; McCarthy writes of, 
207; letter to Osborne from, 
quoted, 208 

Cobham, Lady, the Elegy 
shown to, 133; bequests of, 
134 

Coleman, Mr., 149 

Coleridge, Lloyd a friend of, 
138 

Collector, The , article about 
Spring published in the, 37, 
50 

Collins, Miss, letter from 
Locker-Lampson to, quoted, 

145 

Commemoration Ode by Lowell 
121 

Confederacy, The, quotation 
from, 12 

Congreve, 156 


Convocation of Bishops re¬ 
ferred to, 23 

Cooper, Ashore and Afloat, 
by, 146 

Copley, J., letter of, quoted, 
224 

Cosmopolitan Magazine, article 
in, 82 

Cottenham, Lord, a Victorian 
Chancellor, 221; handwriting 
of, 223 

Cotton, Sir Robert, finds 
Magna Charta, 301 
Council, suspension of mem¬ 
bers from the, 170 
Cowper, Gulielmus, name on 
flyleaf, 314 

Cranworth, Lord, a Victorian 
Chancellor, 22; letter to Mr. 
Panizzi from, quoted, 227 
Crisis, The, a pamphlet by 
Richard Steele, 161 
Crisp, “Daddy,” Miss Burney 
writes, 165 

Croesus referred to, 22 
Cullum, Sir Thomas, paper 
borrowed from, 34 
Curse of Kehama, The, intro¬ 
ductory lines from, 147 
Curtis, George William, letter 
from Emerson to, quoted, 
281; Thoreau receives help 
from, 296 
Cuttuch, 170 

Cyclopaedia of American Bio¬ 
graphy by Appleton, 37 

Danforth, Elliott, 98 
Daniel, George, Hazlitt speaks 
of, 12 

Davey quoted, 14 
Davis, Bancroft, Taylor writes 
of, 256 

De Libris, quotation from 
prologue of, 1 

De Quincey, Thomas, records 
of, 108; writes of Lloyd, 138; 
Dr. Garnett speaks of, 139; 
gives opinion of Evelyn, 158; 
referred to, 179; letter to a 






322 


Unfcei 


De Quincey— Continued 
lawyer from, quoted, 182 fif.; 
Carlyle writes of, 186 

Denmark, American Minister 
to, 80 

Dickens, Charles, letter from, 
on sale, 25; letter to Riddle 
from, quoted, 177; letter to 
Thomas Milton from, quoted 
196 ff.; 74; price of letter of, 
307; burns his letters and 
papers, 308 

Dickens in Pen and Pencil 
quoted, 309 

Dictionary of National Bio¬ 
graphy by Dr. Garnett, 
139; by Sir Leslie Stephen, 
204;Bernard spoken of in, 
. 2 39 

Disraeli, quoted, note, 10; 
Lowe’s hostility to, 213 

Divine Tragedy , The Taylor 
receives advance sheets of, 
265 

Dix, General John A., a letter 
of, 308 

Dobson, Austin, 1 

Doctor, The, by Southey, quoted 
49 

Doeg, W. H., letter from 
Brooks to, quoted, 201 

“Doraku, ” meaning “hobby, ” 
94 

Dorlon, William L., letter 
from Mr. Eggleston to, 
quoted, 84 

D’Orsay, Count, residence of, 
152 

Draper, Dr. Lyman C., treatise 
on autographs by, 47 

Drexel Institute, manuscript 
of Our Mutual Friend given 
to, 310 

Dryden, an assignment of, 
156; receipts signed by, 
found, 302 

Dudley, Governor Thomas, 
quotation from document 
signed by, 234 

Dumfries, Courier, the, 190 


East India Company, work 
of Robert Clive in the, 169; 
Clive writes of prospects of, 
170 

E-B-, letter to Louis 

Philippe from, quoted, 79 
Edinburgh, famous forgeries of, 
4i 

Edward VI, manuscript in 
hand of, found, 302 
Eggleston, Edward, letter to 
Mr. Dorlon from, quoted, 
84 

Egremont, Lord, letter from 
Shelburne to, quoted, 172 
Elder, letter written by, 
quoted, 222 

Elegy, manuscript of the, 133 
Elizabeth, Queen, letter writ¬ 
ten by, found, 302 
Ellenborough, Lord, writes of 
Cobden and Bright, 210 
Ellesmere, Lord, Campbell 
writes of, 230 

Ellis, S. M., William Harrison 
Ainsworth and His Friends 
by, 193 

Elmo, Whitwell, speaks of 
Gray’s poem, note, 137 
Elzevir, Sallust, J. Swift 
marked in, 314 
Emerson, Poe writes of, 64; 
letter to Curtis from, quoted, 
281; prophet and seer, 282; 
Ireland writes of, 286; be¬ 
comes Rev. H. Ware’s 
assistant, 288; tribute by 
Emma Lazarus to, 292; 
Thoreau lives with, 296; 
260 

Emmet, Dr., referred to, 73, 
104 

Endicott, Governor, quotation 
from a document signed 
by, 234 

English periodical quoted, 8, 9 
“ Essays on Taste,” Robert 
Southey’s criticism of, 2 
Evans, catalogues of, referred 
to, 18 










Unbei 


323 


Evelina by Miss Burney, 165 
Evelyn, John, Diary of, 158; 
friendship of Pepys and, 
159; letter to Pepys from, 
quoted, 159 ff. 

Evening Post , reference to the, 
47 

Everett, Sidney, Taylor writes 
of, 256 

Excursions of a Book Lover 
by Mr. Frederic Rowland 
Marvin, 68 

Fairfax papers, found in box, 

304 

Faug&re, Mr. Prosper, declares 
letters forgeries, 43 
Field, Cyrus, Cobden writes 
of, 208; gives banquet to 
the Commission, 217; letter 
from Northcote to, quoted, 
218; talks to Young Girls’ 
Club, 265 

Field, Osgood & Co., offer to 
Harte from, 250; letter from 
Harte to, quoted, 251 
Fields, Mrs. James T., note 
from, quoted, 123; specimen 
of Shelley belonging to, 153 
Fisher, John, servant to Mr. 
Milton, 156 

Fiske, Professor Willard, letter 
from Taylor to, quoted, 255 
Fitzgerald, Percy, Memories 
of an Author , by, 80 
Fitzharding, Lady, 150 

F-J., Reverend, a despiser 

of autographs, 56; note 
written to a lady by, quoted, 

57 , , 1 

Fletcher, catalogue of, referred 
to, 18 

Floyer, Clive sends for, 170 
Forster, John, Life of Dickens 
by, referred to, 81; Dickens’s 
manuscripts given to, 310 
Fosbrook, Lord, referred to 
by Mrs. Siddons, 26 
Fox, Charles James, letter of, 

105 


France, Spain in war against 
England with, 171 
Franco-Prussian war, Lowell 
alludes to, 268 

Franklin, Benjamin, Robert 
Spring forges autograph of, 
37; rescue of letters of, 305; 
price of folio of, 307 
Franklin, Lady, 152 
Fraser, letter from Thackeray 
to, quoted, 195 

Fraser's Magazine, Thacker¬ 
ay’s contributions to, 194 
Frederick the Great, Carlyle 
writes of, 112 

“From Greenland’s Icy Moun¬ 
tains, ” original draft of, 301 
Frowde, Henry, 76 
Frowde, James Anthony, wrong 
spelling of, 76 

Gargery, Joe, referred to, 5 
Garnett, Dr., Dictionary of 
National Biography by, 139 
Geneva, Milton in, 62 
Gentleman's Magazine, fac¬ 
similes published in, 33 
Germaine, 240 

Gladstone, Mr., letter to au¬ 
tograph collectors from, 
quoted, 85; Rideing writes 
of, 125; letter to Rideing 
from, quoted, 126 
Gladstone Reform Bill, Lowe 
writes about the, 214 
Gloucester, Duchess of, letter 
from, on sale, 25 
Goodspeed, C. E., a note to, 
59; curiosities of, 78 
Gosse, Mr., quoted, 4; speaks 
of Gray and Miss Speed, 
note, 133; 135 

Graham, William, Carlyle 
writes of, 19 

Granger, James, the Shiplake 
parson, 75 

Grant, General, a paper signed 
by, 20 

Gray, Thomas, romance of 
Miss Speed and, 133 ff.; 







324 


■flnbei 


Gray, Thomas— Continued 
manuscript by, 133; Miss 
Speed and Mrs. Schaub 
call on, 134; poems in Mit- 
ford edition, 134; different 
versions of poems by, 136 
ff.; suspended from the 
Council, 170 

“Great Punch Editor, A,” 
the Life of Shirley Brooks 
by G. S. Layard, 200 
Greeley, Horace, on autograph 
hunters, 83; letter from 
Bright to, quoted, 210 
Green, Benjamin, servant to 
Mr. Milton, 156 
Greenaway, Kate, great value 
of autograph of, 103 
Greene, Nathanael, letter to 
Colonel Abele from, quoted, 
243 

Grenville, reference made to, 
12 

Grey, Lady Jane, 130 
Griffen, Lord., 150 
Grosvenor and Bunthorne in 
Patience referred to, 62 
Guide to the Collector , quotation 
from, 14; by Scott and 
Pavey, 48 

Gurney, Mr., St. Leonards 
writes of offer made to, 226 
Gwinnett, Button, holograph 
letters of, 54; signer of the 
Declaration o f Independ¬ 
ence, 97 

Gwynne, Nell, autographed 
accounts of, found, 302 


Halsbury, a Victorian Chan¬ 
cellor, 221 

Halpine, Chas. G., Miles 
O’Reilly uses nom de plume , 
of, 278; letter to Chase from, 
quoted, 280 

Hamilton, Alexander, letter 
from Washington to, 105; 
Rogers writes of a letter from 
George Washington to, 156 


Hancock, John, handwriting 
of, 10 

Handwriting of prominent peo¬ 
ple, description of, 10 
Hanmer, Sir Thomas, letter 
from Prior to, quoted, 149; 
letter from Steele to, quoted, 
162 

Hannibal referred to, 77 
“Harding, Emma” Spring 
takes alias of, 37 
Hardinge, George, letter from 
Mrs. Siddons, to, 26 
Harrison, Colonel, Lee writes 
of, 246 

Harrison papers, finding and 
burning of, 307 
Hart, Bob, plea of, 38 
Hart, John, autograph of, 102 
Harte, Bret, first appearance 
of story by, 249; letter to 
publishers from, quoted, 250; 
Underwood succeeds, 263; 
talks to Young Girls’ Club, 
256 

Harte, Bret, Life of, 245 
Hastings, Warren, speech by 
Burke against, 19 
Hatherly, a Victorian Chan¬ 
cellor, 221, 230; letter to 
Lady Selbome from, quoted, 
231 

Hatton, Sir Christopher 
Campbell writes of, 230 
Haunted Man, The, disappear¬ 
ance of manuscript of, 310 
Hawley to talk to Young 
Girls’ Club, 265 

Hawthorne, Julian, writes of 
his father, 272 

Hawthorne, Nathaniel, essay 
by, quoted, 46, 47; com¬ 
parison between Poe and, 
66; indignant at autograph 
hunters, 122; Julian Haw¬ 
thorne writes of, 272; letter 
written by, quoted, 273; 
name on flyleaf, 313 
Hay, Colonel, Arnold writes 
of, 245 






■flnbei 


325 


Hayes, Mr., 254 
Hayley, Gulielmus, name on 
flyleaf, 314 

Hayward, Esq., Solicitor, 
letter from P. B. Shelley 
to, quoted, 153 
H a z 1 i 11, William Carew, 
quoted, 12 

Hearn, Lafcadio, collector of 
Japanese pipes, 94 
Heath, Archbishop, Campbell 
writes of, 230 

Heath, General, Lee writes of, 
246 

Heber, original draft of “ Green¬ 
land’s Icy Mountains” by, 
301 

Hebrew grammar, Carlyle’s 
name on flyleaf of, 314 
Hebrides, Dr. Tohnson’s tour 
in, 144 

Henry VI, autograph letters 
during reign of, 61 
Henry VII, autograph letters 
during reign of, 61 
Herod, supposed letter from 
Lazarus to, 42 

Herschell, Natural Science , by, 
192; a Victorian Chancellor, 
221 

Hewes, Joseph, price of letter 
by, 307 

Hiawatha, Taylor writes to 
Longfellow about, 265 
Hill, Dr. George Birkbeck, 
quoted, 14; Talks About 
Autographs by, 35, 47; ref¬ 
erence made to papers of, 
48; edition of Boswell by, 
163 

History of Civilisation , Buckle’s, 
204 

History of English Literature , 
by Nicoll and Seccombe, 
reference made to, 61 
History of the American Revolu¬ 
tion by Trevelyan, quoted, 
235 

“Hobby Club, The,” organisa¬ 
tion of, 49 


Hobhouse, burning of Byron’s 
autobiography by, 311 
Hogg, Mr., speaks of De 
Quincey, 185 

Holmes, Oliver Wendell, princi¬ 
ples of, 60; autograph of, 
101; graciousness of, 116; 
letter to De Wolfe Howe 
from, 119; letter to Long¬ 
fellow from, quoted, 120; let¬ 
ter to Taylor from, quoted, 
262; letter to Underwood 
from, quoted, 263 
Hood, letter to F. O. Ward 
from, quoted, 146 
Hopkins, Stephen, handwrit¬ 
ing of, 10 

Houghton, Lord, Smith speaks 
of, 20 

Hours of Idleness , “Oscar of 
Alva” in, quoted, 140, 141 
Howe, DeWolfe, letter from 
Holmes to, 119 
Howe, Sir William, 240 
Howells to talk to Young 
Girls’ Club, 265 
Howitt’s German Book , 146 
Hunt, Leigh, Procter speaks 
of, 155; referred to, 179 
Hurst, Bishop, 104 
Hurstboum Park, reference to, 
44 

Hutton, Laurence, library of, 
93; Talks in a Library by, 
127; quotations from book 
by, 128,129 


Iceland, 80 

Ichabod, Whittier’s injustice to 
Webster in, 252 

Iddesleigh, Lord, see Sir Staf¬ 
ford Northcote, 2 
In Memoriam referred to, 12 
Indiana, forged pass of 
Washington found in, 39 
Ingersoll, Robert, interview 
with Gladstone, 125 
Ireland, Mr., Biographical 
Sketch by, quoted, 286 







326 


Hni>er 


Irving, Sir Henry, autograph 
of, referred to, 22; Poe 
writes of, 64 

Iscariot, Judas, supposed letter 
to Mary Magdalene from, 
42 

Islington referred to, 17 
Ivanhoe , price of manuscript 
of, 312 

“Jackson, Fanny” Spring 
assumes name of, 38 
Jacob, Mr., poems given to, 
133 

ames, Henry, referred to, 5 
ameson, Dr., autograph of, 
referred to, 22 

Jay John, value of letter of, 101 
Jay Mr., treasures bought by, 
301 

Jefferson, Robert Spring forges 
autograph of, 37 
Jenks, Edward, tells of “find,” 
300 

Jerrold, Blanchard, speaks of 
Thackeray and Ainsworth, 
194 

Jersey, Lord and Lady, 150 
Johnson, Dr., remark of, 
quoted, 7; Beattie writes of, 
144; record of Dr. Campbell’s 
visit to, 300 

Johnson, Samuel, letter written 
by, quoted, 163 

Johnson, Sir William, discovery 
of papers of, 307 
Johnston, Mr., Lee writes of, 
246 

Joline, Mr., Mr. Broadley at 
issue with, 70 

Jones, J. Beauchamp, Poe 
writes of, 64 

Jordan, Mrs., reference to, 140 
Journal of a Residence and 
Tour in the United States, 
by Abdy, 89 

Katisha in the Mikado, re¬ 
ferred to, 3 


Keats, Jenks finds manu¬ 
script book of, 300; 72 

Kelsall, Clive sends for, 170 
Kenilworth, price of manu¬ 
script of, 312 

Kennedy, John S., false manu¬ 
scripts bought by, 41 
Ker, Bellenden, a law re¬ 
former, 225; writes of Broug¬ 
ham, 315 

Kipling, Rudyard, manuscript 
of, 113; referred to, 116 
Kirtlebridge, Carlyle writes 
of, 189 

Kitton, Mr., quoted, 309 
“Knapp, The,” Bradpole, 
Mr. Broadley’s retreat, 48 

Lake School, Lloyd a poet of, 

138 

Lamb, Charles, Lloyd a friend 
of, 138; Procter speaks of 
his memoir of, 155 
Lamb and the Lloyds, Charles 
by, E. V. Lucas, 138 
Lang, Andrew, Northcote’s 
biographies, 218; quoted, 219 
Lawrence, Sir Thomas, owner 
of Milton document, 156 
Layard, G. S., Life of Shirley 
Brooks by, 200 
Lazarus, supposed letter from 
Herod to, 42 

Lazarus, Emma, pays tribute 
to Emerson, 292 
L-B-, an autograph col¬ 

lector, 24 

Leading American Essayists by 
Payne, 296 

Lear, Edward, letter to Miss 
Perry from, quoted 145 
Lee, Richard Henry, a letter 
written by, quoted, 245; 
as an orator, 248 
Leicester suspended from the 
Council, 170 

Leman, Rev. Mr., poems 
given to, 135 

Lenox Library, false manu¬ 
scripts presented to, 41 







fln&ei 


327 


Letters of Charles Dickens , The , 
195 

Letters of Lord Chesterfield, 32 
Letters to the Countess of 
Ailesbury, Walpole’s, 135 
Life of Louis Philippe , 146 
Lincoln, Abraham, Bright 
writes of, 211 

Linley, Mr., referred to by 
Mrs. Siddons, 26 
Liverpool, Dr., Raffles of, 19 
Lives , Sanderson’s reference 
to, 73 

Lloyd, Charles, romance of 
Sarah Pemberton and, 138; 
a minor poet, 138; writes 
of elopement to Southey, 139 
Locker, Frederick, Holmes 
writes of, 120 

Locker-Lampson, Frederick, 
letter to Miss Collins from, 
quoted, 145; note written, 
by, quoted, 205 

London, sale of autographs in, 
25 M 7 

Longfellow, principles of, 60; 
graciousness of, 116; line from 
Journal of, quoted, 118; 
letter from Holmes to, 
quoted, 120; letter to Taylor 
from, quoted, 267 
Long Story , The , by Gray, 134 
Lord of Himself by Under¬ 
wood, referred to, 263 
Loud, Mrs., M. St. Leon, 
Poe writes of, 64 
Louis, Philippe, King, letter 
to, quoted, 79 

Lowe, Robert, Viscount Sher¬ 
brooke, 212; letter to a 
friend from, quoted, 213; 
letter from, quoted, 214; 
opposes Gladstone bill, 216 
Lowell, James Russell, refer¬ 
ence to, 45; “For An Auto¬ 
graph” by, quoted, 54; quo¬ 
tation from, 55; Mr. Brick’s 
estimate of, 65; surliness 
of, 117; letter to Taylor from, 
quoted, 267; speaks of 


Thoreau, 293, 294; sums up 
Walden matter, 298 
Lucas, E. V., Charles Lamb 
and the Lloyds by, 138 
Lucile referred to, 5 
“Luck of Roaring Camp,” 
first appearance of, 249 
Luther, handwriting of, 121 
Lyle, Sir H. Maxwell, explora¬ 
tions at Belvoir, 304 
Lynch, Jr., Thomas, referred 
to, 15, 30; holograph letters 
of, 54; value of signature 
of, 109 

Lyndhurst, the most brilliant 
of the Victorian Chancellors, 
221; handwriting of, 223; 
comment by, 315 
“Lyra Autographica” by the 
author, quoted, 51 
Lytton, Bulwer, letter from, 
on sale, 25 

Macaulay, handwriting of, 10; 
referred to, 72 

Macdonald, Sir Hector, auto¬ 
graph of, referred to, 22 
Maclaren, Ian, referred to, 125 
Madan, Mr. Falconer, quoted, 

11 

Madden, Sir Frederick, Sir 
Brewster’s letter to, quoted, 
43 

Magdalene, Mary, supposed 
letter from Judas Iscariot 
to, 42 

Magna Charta, Sir Cotton 
finds one of originals of, 301 
Maitland, Sir R., collection of 
Scottish poems belonging to, 
160 

Mann, Horace, referred to, 116 
Mansfield, Earl of, Burnett’s 
book to be sent to, 168 
Many Celebrities and a Few 
Others by William H. Ride- 
ing, 125 

Marryat referred to, 49 
Marshall, Chief Justice, value 
of letter of, 100 





328 


lln&ei 


Marvin, Mr. Frederick Row¬ 
land, chapter on “Holo¬ 
graphs” in book by, 68; 
writes of Van Buren, 69 
Mary, Queen of Scots, ac¬ 
count of execution of, found, 
301 

Mayhew, Horace, letter of, 
200 

Mazarin Bible, most expensive 
book in the world, 29 
McCarthy, Justin, writes of 
Cobden, 207; Portraits of the 
Sixties by, 214 

McClellan, General, Bright 
writes of, 211 

McIntosh, Lachlan, Button 
Gwinnett killed by, 98 
Mcjilton, Poe writes of, 64 
McKinley, Cornelius Bliss, 
Secretary of the Interior 
under, 49 

McLane, Louis, dispute be- 
ween Van Buren and, 107 
Mediaeval Paleography, Madan 
lecturer of, in Oxford, 

11 

Melancthon, handwriting of, 
121 

Melville, letter from Lowe to, 
quoted, 214 

Memories of an Author by 
Percy Fitzgerald, 80 
Mendenhall, Lawrence, Among 
My Autographs by, 87; 
methods of, 91 
Mendenhall, Mr., 89 
Meredith, George, referred to, 
4 

Middlebrook, Washington’s 
army encamped at, 422 
Middleton, Miss, Buckle’s 
mother was a, 205 
Mikado , the, reference to 
Katisha in, 3 

Mill, John Stuart, 104; letter 
to Riddle from, quoted, 176 
Miller, Major, De Quincey 
writes of, 184 

Milnes, Richard Monckton, a 


successful collector, 20; re¬ 
ferred to, 104 

Milton, John, writes in Car- 
doyn’s album, 62; historical 
document of, 156 
Milton, Life of, Hayley’s, 314 
Mitchell, Donald G., speaks of 
Hawthorne, 272; speaks of 
Thoreau in his American 
Land and Letters , 295 
Mitford, John, edition of, 134 
Mitton, Thomas, letter from 
Dickens to, quoted, 196 ff.; 
manuscript of Christmas 
Carol, given to, 310 
Monboddo, Lord, James Bur¬ 
nett becomes, 167 
Monroe, James, reference made 
to election of, 6 
Montagu, Lady Mary Wortley, 
finding of letters of, 304 
Montague quoted, 7 
Moore, Alfred, value of letter 
of, 100; burning of Byron’s 
autobiography by, 311 
Morgan, J. P., American col¬ 
lector, 77; as a collector, 103 
Morris, George P., letter from 
Aldrich to, quoted, 274 
Morris, Robert, referred to, 30 
Morrison, Alfred, collection of, 
19 

Morse, Mr., quoted, 119 
Morton, Dr., Burnett’s book 
to be sent to, 168 
Motley, John Lothrop, dis¬ 
agreeable experience of, 268; 
letter to Badeau from, 
quoted, 270 
Mozart, letter of, 105 
Murat, handwriting of, 10 
Murray, John, letter written 
by, 142; burning of Byron’s 
autobiography by, 311 
Musgrave, Mr., 160 
My Study Windows by Lowell 
quoted, 298 

Napier, Baron, note from, 
quoted, 122 





Unbei 


329 


Napoleon referred to, 77 
Napoleon,* Sloane’s, referred to, 
73 

Napoleon and his Marshals , 
73 

Natural Science by Herschell, 
192 

Nelson, Lord, supposed letter 
of, 68 

Newton, Sir Isaac, Chasles 
writes a book about, 42; 
supposed letter to Pascal 
from, 43; forged letter of, 
quoted, 44; receipts signed 
by, found, 302 

Nichols, John Gough, Auto¬ 
graphs of Remarkable Person¬ 
ages, etc., by, 48 
Nicoll, W. Robertson, reference 
to History of English Liter¬ 
ature, by, 61 

Nicolson, Mr., Archdeacon of 
Carlisle, quoted, 160 
North American Review, article 
published in, 125 
North, Lord, refuses Carleton’s 
resignation, 241 
Northcote, Sir Stafford, comes 
to the United States, 217; 
Field applies to, 217 
Norway, 80 
Norwood, Mr., 152 

Old and Odd Memories by 
Lionel Tollemache, 67 
Oldmixon, account of American 
Colonies by, 150 
O’Reilly, Miles, nom de plume 
of Halpine, 278 
Osborn, W. H., letter from 
Cobden to, quoted, 207 
“Oscar of Alva,” a poem in 
Hours of Idleness , by Byron, 
140 

Osgood, letter from Taylor to, 
quoted, 257 

Our Mutual Friend, manuscript 
of, in wreck with Dickens, 
199; G. W. Childs owner of 
manuscript of, 310 


Oxford, University of, Mr. 
Madan, a lecturer at, 11; 
reference to professors of, 21 

Painters, Ship and Turtle on 
Leadenhall Street, Thack¬ 
eray speaks of, 194 
Palmerston, McCarthy writes 
of, 207 

Panizzi, letter from Lord Cran- 
worth to, quoted, 227 
Paradise Lost, reference to, 26; 
receipt for copyright of, 33; 
contracts for sale of, 157 
Paris Sketch Book, The, 
Thackeray’s works printed 
as, 194 

Park edition, Gray’s verses in, 
135; copy of Gray’s poem, 136 
Parker, Judge Alton B., anec¬ 
dote related about, 49 
Parker, Sir Gilbert, anecdote 
told of, 95 

Parsons, Dr., finds Pepperell 
papers, 307 

Pascal, Chasles writes about, 
42; forged letters from Hon. 
Robert Boyle to, 42 
Paston Letters, five volumes of 
autograph letters in, 61 
Paterson, General, Carleton 
writes of, 241 

Patience, reference made to, 62 
Patton, Dr. Francis Landey, 
referred to, 109 

Pavey and Scott, Guide to the 
Collector of Historical Docu¬ 
ments by, 48 

Pawkins, Major, Mr. Brick’s 
estimate of, 64 

Payne, William Morton, writes 
of Thoreau, 296 
Peacock, Mrs., Shelley pays 
debt of, 153 

Pemberton, Samuel, Sophia, 
daughter of, 138 
Pemberton, Sophia, Charles 
Lloyd elopes with, 138 
Pemberton, T. Edgar, Life of 
Harte, by, 249 






33» 


Unfcei 


Pepperell papers, Dr. Parsons 
finds, 307 

Pepys, Samuel, diary of, 158; 
friendship of Evelyn and, 
159; letter from Evelyn to, 
quoted, 159 ff. 

Pericles, supposed letter to 
Alcibiades from, 42 
Perry, Miss, letter from Lear 
to, quoted, 145 

Petty, William, Earl of Shel¬ 
burne, 171 

Peyriere, de la, marries Miss 
Speed,134 

Philadelphia, Spring tried in, 
37 

Phillips, Ambrose, copy of a 
poem by, 314 

Pickering, Colonel, Arnold 
writes of, 245 

Picture of St. John , The, by 
Bayard Taylor, 151 
Pierce, Mr. John, quoted, 89 
Plassey, Robert Clive, Baron 
of, 169 

Pleasures of Hope and other 
Poems, The , inscription in, 
314 

Pliny, an autograph collector, 
60 

Plumer, William, note, 6 
Poe, Edgar Allan, a “Chapter 
on Autography” by, 64; 
comparison between Haw¬ 
thorne and, 66 

Poems by S. T. Coleridge, 
Second Edition, Lloyd’s 
postscript to, 138 
“Poets’ Corner,” manuscript 
in the, 133 

Pompey, supposed letter from 
Cleopatra to, 42 
Poore, Ben. Perley, letter from 
Whittier to, quoted, 253 
Pope, the, autograph of, re¬ 
ferred to, 22 

Pope, A., signature on copy of 
poem, 314 

Portraits of the Sixties by 
McCarthy, quoted, 214 


Powers, Mr., an American 
sculptor, 227 

Practical Guide for the Collector, 
A, by Mr. Broadley, 48 
Practical Manual for Amateurs 
and Historical Students, A, 
by Dr. Scott, 48 
Pringle, Sir John, Burnett’s 
book to be sent to, 168 
Prior, Matthew, letter to Sir 
Thomas Hanmer from, 
quoted, 149 

Procter, Bryan Waller, gives 
away Charles Lamb letter, 
123; a letter of, quoted, 154, 
155 

Prud’homme, M., speech of, 
quoted, 22, 23 

Prussia, England abandons, 
171 

Puckering, Sir John, Campbell 
writes of, 230 

Puttick & Simpson, Milton 
receipt sold by, 33 
Pybus, letter from Clive to, 
quoted, 169 

Rab, Dr. Brown writes of, 311 
Raffles, Doctor, a famous 
collector, 19; “finds” of, 301 
Raleigh, Professor Walter, 7 
Ramsey, Mrs., Prior sends 
respects to, 150 
Recollections of Edmund Yates, 
74 

Recollections of Sixty Years 
Ago by the Bancrofts, 86 
Rejected Addresses, The, quota¬ 
tion from, 147 

Reminiscences, Carlyle writes 
of De Quineey in, 186 
Retrospect of Forty Years by 
William Allen Butler, 105 
Reynolds, Sir Joshua, 130 
Kiddle, William, letter from 
Ruskin to, quoted, 175; 
letter from Mill to, quoted, 
176; letter from Dickens to, 
177; letter from Cobden to, 
quoted, 178 





H nbcr 


331 


Rideing, William H., comment 
on book by, 125; letter from 
Gladstone to, 126 
Riedesel, Baron von, letter 
from Carleton to, quoted, 
24 1 

Ripon, Marquis of, comes to 
the United States, 217 
Riverside edition by James 
R. Lowell, autograph poem 
from, quoted, 54 
Roberts, Lord, autograph of, 
referred to, 22 

Robespierre, handwriting of, 10 
Robinson, Professor Charles, 
article by, 82; referred to, 
87; Bryant writes of, 121; 
his way of getting auto¬ 
graphs, 174 

Rogers, Samuel, a collector, 
104; letter from, quoted, 156; 
price paid for Milton docu¬ 
ment by, 157 

Roland, Mme., finding of 
letters of Buzot and, 304 
Roosevelt, ex-President, auto¬ 
graph of, referred to, 22 
Rosary , The , referred to, 5 
Rosebery, Lord, referred to, 116 
Rossetti, Christina, letter to 
Bayard Taylor from, quoted, 

I 5 I 

Roumania, Queen of, auto¬ 
graph of, referred to, 22 
Ruddigore, 285 

Rupell, Mr., Clive sends for, 
170 

Ruskin, John, his opinion of 
readers, 5; letter from, on 
sale, 25; letter to Riddle 
from, quoted, 175 
Russell, Mr. G. W. E., quoted, 
217 

Ryerson-Dick, forged pass for, 
sold, 39 

St. Leonards (Sugden), a Vic¬ 
torian Chancellor, 221; letter 
to Brougham from, quoted, 
226 


Sahara, Desert of, referred to, 
24 

Salisbury, Lord, autograph of, 
referred to, 22 

Sandwich, Lady, Prior writes 
of, 150 
Sargent, 131 

Savannah, Gwinnett in, 98 
Savoy, Comtesse Viry’s castle 

in, 135 

Schaub, Mrs., calls on Thomas 
Gray, 134 

Schiller, forged letters of, 41 
Schoenewald, Cornet, Carleton 
writes of, 241 

Scot, George, Burnett’s book 
to be sent to, 168 
Scotland, Dr. Johnson’s tour 
in, 144 

Scotsbrig, Carlyle at, 191 
Scott and Pavey, Guide to the 
Collector of Historical Docu¬ 
ments , etc., by, 48 
Scott, Dr., quoted, 14, 34; 
references to Upcott made 
by, 16; Milton forgery 
pointed out by, 33, 34; 
writes of forgeries, 35; 
quoted on Spring’s trial, 38; 
A Practical Manual for 
Amateurs and Historical 
Students by, 48; tells of 
supposed letter of Lord 
Nelson, 68; letter of, 105; 
writes of “finds,” 300 
•Scott, Sir Walter, autograph 
of, on sale, 25; forged auto¬ 
graph of, by A. H. Smith, 41 
Seccombe, Thomas, reference 
to History of English Litera¬ 
ture by, 61 

Selborne, Lady, letter from 
Hatherly to, quoted, 231 
Selborne, Lord, a Victorian 
Chancellor, 221, 228 
Senior suspended from the 
council, 170 

Seward, William H., 104 
Shakespeare, William, holo¬ 
graph letters of, 54 






332 


Unfcei 


Shelburne, William Pitt, Earl 
of, letter to Lord Egremont 
from, quoted, 172 
Shelf of Old Books , A, note of 
Shelley’s from, 153 
Shelley, Percy B., forged let¬ 
ters of, 41; letter to Hay¬ 
ward from, quoted, 153 
Shepard, Edward Morse, biog¬ 
raphy of Van Buren by, 69 
Sheridan, reference made to, 12 
Shiplake, James Granger, the 
parson of, 76 

Siddons, Mrs., letter from, on 
sale, 25 

“Signers of the Declaration of 
Independence,” 73 
Simon, Algernon 0., writes 
Brooks for autograph, 201 
Simpson, Samuel, Robert 
Southey writes verse for, 
124 

Sims, Mr. George R., book by, 
47 

Skene, Sir Jo., 160 
Skimpole, Harold, 108 
Smalley, George W., referred 
to, 180 

Smith, Alexander Howland, 
imprisoned for Edinburgh 
forgeries, 41 

Smith, General E. Kirby, 
written order of, 308 
Smith, Goldwin, author of 
Social Life in London , 20; 
exile to Canada of, 21 
Snider, Denton J., 77 
Social Life in London by Gold- 
win Smith, 20 

“ Society for the Suppression of 
Albums,” Southey suggests 
a, 124 
Socrates, 77 

Sotheby, catalogue of, referred 
to, 18 

South Kensington Museum, 
Dickens’s manuscripts pre¬ 
sented to, 310 

Southey, Robert, criticism of 
Essays on Taste , by 2; 


quoted, 8; The Doctor by, 
quoted, 49; verse by, quoted, 
124; Lloyd a friend of, 138; 
letter from Lloyd to, quoted, 
139; The Curse of Kehama by, 
147; handwriting of, 147; 
Tale of the Three Bears by, 
147; letter to William Webb 
from, quoted, 148 
Spain in war against England, 

l 7i 

Speed, Miss Harriet, Comtesse 
de Virri, 133; romance of 
Thomas Gray and, 133 ff.; 
calls on Thomas Gray, 134; 
marriage of, 134 
Sprague, Dr. William B., an 
autograph collector, 89, 91, 
104 

Spring, Robert, Washington’s 
name forged by, 36; tried for 
forgery, 37; forges auto¬ 
graphs of Washington, 
Franklin, Jefferson, etc., 37; 
methods of, 37; vindicated, 
38; deceives a Massachusetts 
collector, 39 

Staplehurst, Dickens’s account 
of accident at, 195 
Stapleton quoted, 49 
Steele , Life of, Aitken’s, 162 
Steele, Richard, The Crisis , a 
pamphlet by, 161; expelled 
from Parliament, 162; letter 
to Hanmerfrom, quoted, 162 
Stephen, Sir Leslie, referred to, 
104, 227, 228; letter from 
Buckle to, quoted, 204; 
Stevenson referred to, 116 
Stoke Manor House, Lady 
Cobham resident of, 133 
Story of a Bad Boy by Haw¬ 
thorne, 273 

Sugden as a lawyer, 224 
Sun , the, 100 

Swift, J., name on title-page, 314 
Swinburne, 140 

Tale of the Three Bears by 
Southey, 147 





Ilnbei 


333 


Talks About Autographs by 
Dr. George B. Hill, 35, 47 
Talks in a Library with Laur¬ 
ence Hutton , 127 
Taylor, Bayard, letter from 
Christina Rossetti, 151; 
letter from Tennyson to, 
quoted, 152; letter to Fiske 
from, quoted, 255; letter to 
Osgood from, 257; letter 
from Bancroft to, quoted, 
260 ff.; letter from Holmes 
to, quoted, 262; note from 
Mark Twain to, quoted, 265; 
writes to Longfellow about 
Hiawatha, 265; Longfellow 
sends advance sheets of work 
to, 265; letter from Long¬ 
fellow to, quoted, 266; letter 
from Lowell to, quoted, 267 
Tefft, Israel K., letter from 
Bryant to, quoted, 121; 
reference made to story 
about, 305 

Teignmouth, Lord, autograph 
of, 90 

“Telautograph,” invention 
called, 53 

Temple, Rev. W. J., corre¬ 
spondence of James Boswell 
and, found, 303 
Tennyson, letter to Bayard 
Taylor, from, quoted, 152; 
referred to, 12, 140 
Tenterden, Lord. See Abbott 
Thackeray, W. M., referred to, 
12, 74; letter to Ainsworth 
from, quoted, 193 
Thomas Augustus, plays of, 96 
Thoreau, Henry D., letter 
to Wiley & Putnam from, 
quoted, 293; Lowell speaks 
of, 293, 294; Burroughs 
speaks of, 293, 294; Mitchell 
writes of, 295; life at Walden 
of, 295; lives with Emerson, 
297; Lowell writes of, 298 
Thumb, Tom, referred to, 77 
Thurloe papers, finding of, 304 
Tilden, Mr., 254 


Titan , Mr. Hogg editor of, 185 

Togo, Admiral, autograph of, 
referred to, 22 

Tollemache, Lionel, story re¬ 
lated by, 67 

Toulmin, Dr., verses of, 146 

Trevelyan, Sir George, jingle 
by, 104 

Tribune , letter of Bright’s 
printed in the, 210 

Truro, a Victorian Chancellor, 
221 

Turner, Dawson, the botanist, 
16; letter on the death of 
Upcott by, 17, 18; Milton 
receipt among manuscripts 
of, 33; letter from collection 
of, 149 

Twain, Mark, note to Taylor, 
quoted, 265 

Twiss, Life of Eldon, Hood 
writes of, 146 


Underwood, F. H., succeeds 
Bret Harte as consul at 
Glasgow, 263; letter from 
Holmes to, quoted, 263 
United States, increase of 
collectors in the, 19 
Upcott, William, an English 
collector, 16; Scott’s refer¬ 
ence to, 16; Turner writes of 
death of, 17, 18; an opinion 
of collection of, 149 


Van Brugh, quotation from 
The Confederacy by, 12 
Van Buren, Martin, Marvin 
writes of, 69; Shepard’s 
biography of, 69; unfinished 
autobiography by, 107 
Vanity Fair referred to, 12, 26 
Vatel, M., love letters found 


b Y» 3°4 , 

Vatican, autograph of Luther 
in the, 122 

Vicar of Wakefield , The, 

author’s copy of, 313 
Victoria, Queen, letter from 
on sale, 25 





334 


llnbex 


Victorian Chancellors , The , by 
J. B. Atlay, 220 
Virri, Comtesse de. See 
Harriet Speed 
Viry, on Lake Geneva, 134 
Vrain-Lucas, M. Chasles 
swindled by, 41; meets his 
Waterloo, 42; trial and im¬ 
prisonment of, 43 

Walpole, Horace, and Lady 
Cobham, 133; quoted, 133; 
signature on copy of poem, 314 
Ward, Artemus, poem by 
author to, 50; letter of 
Brooks to, 202; letter writ¬ 
ten by, quoted, 275 
“Ward, Artemus,” 202 
Ward, F. O., letter from Hood 
to, quoted, 146 

Ware, Rev. Henry, Emerson 
becomes assistant to, 288 
Warner talks to Young Girls’ 
Club, 265 

Warwick, reference to, 24 
Washington, Booker T., re¬ 
ferred to, 30 

Washington, George, referred 
to, 30; forged autograph of, 
36; forged pass of, found in 
Boston, 39; autograph forged 
by Robert Spring, 36; letter 
to Hamilton from, 105; 
Rogers writes of letter of, 
156; Webster writes about, 
276; price of letter by, 307; 
referred to, 30 

Watson, John, anecdote told 
of, 125 

Watts, George F., referred to, 
116 

Woverly, part of manuscript of, 
105 

Webb, William, letter from 
Southey to, quoted, 148 
Webster, Daniel, inkstand be¬ 
longing to, 114; Whittier’s 
injustice to, 252 


Webster, Noah, letter written 
by, quoted, 276 
Wedgwood records, finding of, 

304 

Weese, Mr., Greene writes of, 
243 

Wellington, Duke of, letter 
from, on sale, 25; use of 
lithograph by, 67 
Wemmick, Mr., referred to, 301 
Westbury, a Victorian Chan¬ 
cellor, 221 

Westminster Review, The , 

quoted, 199 

W-, G. F., Mr., note from, 

59 

Whittier, John G., author’s 
views on, 252; letter to Mr. 
Poore from, quoted, 253 
Whittier, M. F., John G. 
writes of, 253 

Wilde, Oscar, great value of 
autograph of, 103 
Wilder, Jim, Ward writesof, 275 
Wiley & Putnam, letter from 
Thoreau to, quoted, 293 
Williamson, Mr., Nicolson 
writes of, 160 

Wolsey, Cardinal, autographed 
letters of, 302 

Wood, William Page. See 
Hatherly 

Wordsworth, Lloyd a friend of, 
138 

World’s Best Literature, The, 
by the author, 77 
Wortley, Mr., Steele speaks of 
letter to, 162 

Wotton, Evelyn writes of, 161 
Wren, receipts signed by, 
found, 302 

Yates, Edmund, Recollections 
of, 74 

York, Cardinal, sale of manu¬ 
scripts of, 304 

Young Girls’ Club, Mark 
Twain writes of, 265 









Jl Selection from the 
Catalogue of 

C. P. PUTNAM'S SONS 

* 


Complete Catalogue sent 
on application 











LITERARY LANDMARKS OF 
THE SCOTTISH UNIVERSITIES 

By LAURENCE HUTTON 

Crown octavo. With 42 full-page illustrations. 
Net, $1.25. (By mail, $1.35) 

A handsomely illustrated book telling of the 
associations that have grown up around those fam¬ 
ous institutions of learning in Scotland—the Uni¬ 
versities of Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen, and 
St. Andrews. 

“ The volume has an adequacy and thoroughness, and is 
written in the informing, personal style which was Mr. 
Hutton’s characteristic expression of his delightful person¬ 
ality.”— The Outlook. 

TALKS IN A LIBRARY 
WITH LAURENCE HUTTON 

Recorded by ISABEL MOORE 

Crown octavo. Profusely illustrated. Net, $2.50 
(By mail, $2.75) 

Almost everything in Mr. Hutton’s library was 
associated with some notable person or interesting 
event. Mary Anderson, Edwin Booth, and John 
Fiske are some of the names that were called to a 
1 visitor’s mind. There was a picture of the room 
in which Dickens wrote “ David Copperfield,” a 
book-plate made by Thackeray for Edward Fitz¬ 
Gerald, and a marvellous drawing by Mark Twain. 
Mrs. Moore describes this rare collection in a 
bright entertaining way and brings up many pleas¬ 
ant memories of this genial and cultivated owner. 


G. P. PUTNAM S SONS 

Mew York London 

f_____ 





Comparative 
Administrative Law 

An Jinalysis of the Administrative Systems, 
National and Local, of the United States, 
England, France, and Germany 

By 

FRANK J. GOODNOW, A.H., LL.B. 

Professor of Administrative Law in Columbia University 

Student's Edition. Two volumes in one 
Octavo, net, $3.00 

“ His volumes are remarkably alike for analytical power 
and lucidity of method. His style is as luminous as hat of 
Sir Henry Maine, and his general literary method not unlike 
that great author’s—and there can be no higher praise—in its 
orderliness of arrangement, precision of statement, and true 
scientific spirit. The work is unique and of permanent 
excellence. It fills a vacant place in the library shelves, and 
is a permanent addition of very great value to the science of 
comparative law.”—-N. Y. Tribune . 

“ We regard this work as the most important contribution 
to political science . . . which has been published in this 

country, we will not undertake to say for how long.”— The 
Independent. 

999 

G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS 


New Yorh 


London. 









By Elisabeth Luther Cary 


HENRY DAUMIER. A Collection of His Social and Political 
Caricatures, Together with an Introductory Essay on His Art. 
With 76 illustrations. Royal 8°. Net $3.75. (By mail, $4.00.) 

BROWNING, POET AND MAN. A Survey. Photo¬ 
gravure Edition, with 25 illustrations in photogravure and 
some text illustrations. Octavo, gilt top, net, $3.50. (By mail, 
$3.75.) Library Edition. Illustrated. Octavo, $2.50. 

TENNYSON, HIS HOME, HIS FRIENDS, AND HIS 
WORK. Photogravure Edition, with 22 illustrations in 
photogravure and some text illustrations. Octavo, gilt top, 
net, $3.50. (By mail, $3.72.) Library Edition. Illustrated. 
Octavo, $2.50. 

THE ROSSETTIS, DANTE GABRIEL AND CHRIS¬ 
TINA. Photogravure Edition, with 27 illustrations in 
photogravure and some text illustrations. Octavo, gilt top, 
net, $3.50. (By mail, $3.75.) Library Edition. Illustrated. 
Octavo, $2.50. 

WILLIAM MORRIS; POET, CRAFTSMAN, SOCIAL¬ 
IST. With 42 illustrations in photogravure and some text 
illustrations. Octavo, gilt top, net, $3.50. (By mail, $3-75-) 

RALPH WALDO EMERSON, POET AND THINKER. 

W r ith 20 illustrations in photogravure, including a large number 
of interesting portraits. Octavo, gilt top, net, $3.50. (By 
mail, $3,750 

POEMS OF DANTE GABRIEL ROSSETTI, with illus¬ 
trations after his own designs. Edited by Elisabeth Luther 
Cary, with 22 illustrations in photogravure. Uniform with 
Cary’s “ Rossettis.” Two volumes, octavo, gilt tops. Net, 
$6.50. (By mail, $7.00.) 

THE NOVELS OF HENRY JAMES, with a Bibliography 
by Frederick A. King. Crown octavo. With portrait in 
photogravure. Net, $1.25. (By mail, $1.35.) 

“ Here, truly, is a beautiful series—beautiful as to typography and binding, 
beautiful as to theme, beautiful in the reverence and affection with which that 
theme has been seized upon and elucidated. Nothing will impress her readers 
more than the care and intelligence with which Miss Cary has garnered from 
a rich and varied field the essential and striking incidents in the careers of these 
notable characters .”—New York Times. 


New York Q. P. Putnam’s Sons London 








By George Haven Putnam, Litt.D. 

Authors and Their Public in 
Ancient Times 

A Sketch of Literary Conditions and of the Relations with the 
Public of Literary Producers, from the Earliest Times to the Fall 
of the Roman Empire. 

Second Edition, Revised. Cr. 8vo, gilt top, net $1.50 

The volume is beautifully printed on good paper. . . . 

Every author ought to be compelled to buy and read this bright 
volume, and no publisher worthy of the name should be without 
it.— Publishers' Circular , London. 

Books and Their Makers during 
the Middle Ages 

A Study of the Conditions of the Production and Distribution of 
Literature from the Fall of the Roman Empire to the Close of the 
Seventeenth Century. 

In two volumes, 8vo, cloth extra (sold separately), 
each, net $2.50 

Vol. I, 476-1600, Vol. II, 1500-1709 

“It is seldom that such wide learning, such historical grasp 
and insight, have been employed in their service.” 

Atlantic Monthly. 

Authors and Publishers 

A Manual of Suggestions for Beginners in 
Literature 

Comprising a description of publishing methods and arrange¬ 
ments, directions for the preparation of manuscript for the press, 
explanations of the details of book-manufacturing, instructions for 
proof-reading, specimens of typography, the text of the United 
States Copyright Law, and information concerning International 
Copyrights, together with general hints for authors. 

By G. H. P. and J. B. P. 

Seventh Edition, re-written with additional material. 

8vo, gilt top, net $1.75 

“ This handy and useful book is written with perfect fairness 
and abounds in hints which writers will do well to ‘ make a note 
of. * . . , There is a host of other matters treated succinctly 

and lucidly which it behooves beginners in literature to know, 
and we can recommend it most heartily to them.” 

Lotidon Spectator. 
Send for descriptive circular 


New York G. P. Putnam’s Sons London 














































































































































OCT 28 19)3 
















































































t * » 

. . J - 





































• 



















































































